Latest articles
Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v DV (A Child) [2021] EWHC 1037 (Fam)
(Family Division, Cohen J, 19 April 2021)Medical Treatment – 17-year-old had form of bone cancer and required surgery For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important...
Domestic Abuse Bill
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsAfter years of development the Domestic Abuse Bill returned to the House of Lords in the UK on the 8th March 2021 to complete its report stage, one of the final...
Coercive control and children’s welfare in Re H-N and Others
When families come to strife, arrangements must be made for the future care of any children. In some circumstances, this means an application to the courts. These ‘private law orders’ can...
Profession: Expert Witness
The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
How does a jointly held property pass on death?
When meeting with clients to discuss their succession planning, many cannot recall whether their property is held jointly as joint tenants or jointly as tenants in common. The distinction is that with...
View all articles
Authors

PATERNITY: Ahrens v Germany (App No 45071/09)

Sep 29, 2018, 21:30 PM
Slug : ECHRAppNo4507109
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Mar 28, 2012, 07:11 AM
Article ID : 98135

(European Court of Human Rights; 22 March 2012)

The applicant alleged German court's failure to allow him to challenge another man's legal paternity of a child violated his Art 8 rights. The paternity declared by the mother's new partner with her consent. The German court prevented applicant from challenging paternity despite having a sexual relationship with the mother around the time of conception. The applicant's relationship with the child was not within the scope of family life as his relationship with the mother ended a year prior to conception and thereafter was purely sexual. Decision not to allow challenge of paternity fell within private life. Decision taken in the best interests of the family unit: the mother, her partner and the child. Decision whether to allow to challenge paternity fell within the State's margin of appreciation.  

Case had taken 3 years, 7 months to be determined in Germany, delay did not predetermine issues, procedural requirements of Art 8 had been complied with.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from