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

ADOPTION: Emonet v Switzerland

Sep 29, 2018, 17:16 PM
Slug : emonet-v-switzerland
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Dec 13, 2007, 10:15 AM
Article ID : 87793

(European Court of Human Rights; 13 December 2007)

The mother and child were living with the mother's long-term cohabitant in Switzerland. The father had died; the child, who was severely disabled regarded the mother's cohabitant as her father. The mother, her cohabitant and the child agreed that the cohabitant should adopt the child. Only after the adoption order had been made did the family discover that the order had the effect of terminating the mother's parental tie, and that the child was required to take her adoptive father's name. The mother and child objected, but the Swiss courts refused to restore the mother's parental tie, as previously existing parental ties had to be severed on adoption unless the natural parent was the spouse of the adoptive parent. The family also applied unsuccessfully to have the adoption order set aside.

There had been a breach of the applicants' human rights. Respect for family life required that both biological and social realities be taken into account so as to avoid such unforeseen legal results. The Swiss authorities' failure to take these realities into account had flown in the face of the wishes of the individuals concerned, without actually benefiting anyone. It was not for the national authorities to take the place of those concerned in reaching a decision as to the form of communal life they wished to adopt. The applicants could not be reproached for having been unaware of the extent of the consequences of their request for adoption.

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