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
Help separated parents ditch avoidance strategies that stop them resolving differences
The desire to avoid conflict with an ex is the primary reason that separated parents do not get to see their children.  That’s an eye-opening finding from a survey of 1,105 separated...
What is a Cohabitation Agreement, and do I need one?
Many couples, despite living together, never seek to legally formalise their living and financial arrangements.  They mistakenly believe that the concept of a ‘common law’ husband and...
Welsh Government launches consultation on amendments to adoption regulations
The Welsh Government has launched a consultation on the proposed amendments to the Adoption Agencies (Wales) Regulations 2005 and the Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (Wales) Regulations 2015....
JM v RM [2021] EWHC 315 (Fam)
(Family Division, Mostyn J, 22 February 2021)Abduction – Wrongful retention – Hague Convention application – Mother decided not to return to Australia with children – COVID 19...
Re A (A Child) (Hague Convention 1980: Set Aside) [2021] EWCA Civ 194
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), Moylan, Asplin LJJ, Hayden J, 23 February 2021)Abduction – Hague Convention 1980 – Return order made – Mother successfully applied to set aside due...
View all articles
Authors

ADOPTION/HUMAN RIGHTS: Eski v Austria (Application no 21949/03)

Sep 29, 2018, 17:08 PM
Slug : eski-v-austria-application-no-21949-03
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jan 25, 2007, 04:22 AM
Article ID : 86969

(European Court of Human Rights; 25 January 2007)

The mother and father had separated when the child was 2 years old. The court subsequently refused to allow the father to have contact with the child because the father had assaulted and abused the mother during such contact. Although the father stopped making any maintenance payments, he continued to seek contact with the child. When the child was 8 years old, the mother's husband sought to adopt the child. The court rejected the father's objections to the adoption. The father argued that this decision breached his right to respect for family life under Art 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950.

By a majority, there had been no breach of Art 8; the adoption had been within the State's margin of appreciation. A dissenting opinion was given by two of the judges who considered that the reasons given for dispensing with the father's consent had been insufficient.

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