Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'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
Disabled women more than twice as likely to experience domestic abuse
The latest data from the Office of National Statistics shows that, in the year ending March 2020, around 1 in 7 (14.3%) disabled people aged 16 to 59 years experienced any form of domestic abuse in...
The President of the Family Division endorses Public Law Working Group report
The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary has published a message from the President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, in which the President endorses the publication of the President’s...
HMCTS updates online divorce services guidance
HM Courts and Tribunals Service have recently updated the online divorce services guidance with the addition of guides for deemed and dispensed service applications, alternative service...
Become the new General Editor of The Family Court Practice, the definitive word on family law and procedure
The Family Court Practice (‘The Red Book’) is widely acknowledged as the leading court reference work for all family practitioners and the judiciary. We are currently recruiting a...
The suspension, during lockdown, of prison visits for children: was it lawful?
Jake Richards, 9 Gough ChambersThis article argues that the suspension on prison visits during this period and the deficiency of measures to mitigate the impact of this on family life and to protect...
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