Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
New complaints handling guide offers advice to local authorities
The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman is today issuing new guidance on effective complaint handling for local authorities.Based on previous documents, the new guide offers practical,...
EU laws continue until at least 2038 and beyond
The UK left the EU on 31 January 2020.  But in matters of law it fully leaves on 31 December 2020.  But EU laws will continue to apply, and be applied, in the English family courts from 1...
Family Law Awards winners announced in virtual awards ceremony
The winners of the Family Law Awards 2020 were announced at 4pm during a much-anticipated virtual awards ceremony. Over the past ten years, the Family Law Awards has recognised the leading players in...
Behaviour-based divorces still merit close consideration
Some recent cases illustrate the evidential and procedural issues involved in dealing with proofs on the merits of divorce, which are worth considering even though most cases may conclude on a...
HM Courts & Tribunals Service confirms 2020 Christmas and new year closure dates
HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has confirmed the dates over the Christmas and new year period in which Crown Courts, magistrates’ courts,...
View all articles
Authors

FAMILY PROCEEDINGS: SI v Slovenia (App No 45082/05)

Sep 29, 2018, 19:13 PM
Slug : SIvSloveniaAppNo4508205
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Nov 30, 2011, 12:40 PM
Article ID : 97297

(European Court of Human Rights; 13 October 2011)

At issue was whether interference with Art 8 rights by reason of length of custody and contact proceedings and by reason of failure to enforce interim contact arrangements.

When the mother left the father, the children were aged 7 and 4 and remained in father's care. Shortly after the father issued custody/contact proceedings, the mother took the children to live with her. The court granted interim custody to the father, but this decision was not enforced and was in any event revoked shortly afterwards when the mother objected. The father experienced some problems with contact, but attempted to reach agreement with the mother. The court took 16 months to reach a fresh interim decision to grant provisional custody to the mother with new provisional contact arrangements for only 2 hours contact a week.

The father's appeal was partially successful and contact was much increased.

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