Latest articles
UK Immigration Rough Sleeper Rule
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsThe UK government has recently introduced a controversial new set of rules that aim to make rough sleeping grounds for refusal or cancellation of a migrant’s...
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...
View all articles
Authors

DIVORCE/HUMAN RIGHTS: Charalambous v Cyprus

Sep 29, 2018, 17:07 PM
Slug : charalambous-v-cyprus
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Aug 28, 2007, 07:05 AM
Article ID : 86775

(European Court of Human Rights; 19 July 2007)

The Cypriot husband filed for a divorce from the Romanian wife, in Cyprus. The wife raised preliminary points of law. The main divorce and the interim proceedings were adjourned eight times in 9 months, six times by the parties, and twice by the courts. In the meantime, the Cypriot immigration authorities issued a deportation order against the wife, who resisted on the basis that she needed to be able to attend the divorce proceedings. After the wife's deportation the divorce was granted, but the wife's appeal was eventually allowed, on the basis that she should have been permitted to remain in Cyprus for the trial. After over 5 years, the divorce was finally granted. The husband complained that the length of proceedings had been unreasonable, in breach of Art 6(1) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950.

Although there had been no breach of the Art 8 right to respect for family life, and no breach of the Art 12 right to marry, the length of proceedings had been excessive and failed to meet the 'reasonable time' requirement, in breach of Art 6(1). The nature of the case had not been complex. On the whole there had been no major delays attributable to the husband, although there had been considerable delays at the first instance and appeal stages. Special diligence had been required because of the possible consequences which delay might have, notably on enjoyment of the right to respect for family life.

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