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
Resolution issues Brexit notes for family lawyers ahead of IP completion day
Family lawyer organisation, Resolution, has issued two joint notes to assist family lawyers in England and Wales ahead of the end of the Brexit transition/implementation period at 11 pm on 31 December...
Online filing is real-time on New Year's Eve: practice direction change to accommodate EU withdrawal arrangements
I have heard that there will be an amendment to the relevant practice directions to provide that online applications received on New Year’s Eve after 4:30 PM and before 11:00 PM will count as...
Northamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust v AB
The issue in this case concerned AB’s capacity to make specific decisions about treatment relating to her anorexia nervosa. She was 28 years old and had suffered with anorexia since the age of...
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...
Remote hearings in family proceedings – how is justice perceived?
The motion for the recent Kingsley Napley debate:  “This House believes remote hearings are not remotely fair” was carried with a fairly balanced 56% in favour and 44% against....
View all articles
Authors

ADOPTION/HUMAN RIGHTS: Chepelev v Russia

Sep 29, 2018, 17:07 PM
Slug : chepelev-v-russia
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Aug 28, 2007, 04:22 AM
Article ID : 86767

(European Court of Human Rights; 26 July 2007)

The child's parents had separated when the child was one year old. Since then the father had seen the child only once, when she was 2, although he had sent a few telegrams. The Russian court approved the child's adoption by the mother's new husband, without the father's consent, on the basis that the father had not participated in the child's upbringing or provided financial support, whereas the mother's husband had provided for the child in every way; the child considered the mother's husband to be her only father. The father claimed that the decision was a breach of his right under Art 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 to respect for family life.

While the adoption order was undoubtedly an interference with the father's Art 8 rights, it was in accordance with the law, pursued the legitimate aim of protecting the rights and freedoms of the child, having been made in the child's best interests, and was not disproportionate, given the father's limited relations with the child.

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