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
Re R (Children) (Control of Court Documents) [2021] EWCA Civ 162
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), King, Peter Jackson, Elisabeth Laing LJJ, 12 February 2021)Practice and Procedure – Disclosure of court documents – Sexual abuse findings –...
AG v VD [2021] EWFC 9
(Family Court, Cohen J, 04 February 2021) Financial Remedies – Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984, Part III – Russian divorceThe wife was awarded just under £6m...
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...
SCTS releases new simplified divorce and dissolution forms for Scotland
The Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service (SCTS) has released new simplified divorce and dissolution forms of application. As a result of legislation repealing Council Regulation EC 2201/2003, the...
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....
View all articles
Authors

IMMIGRATION: Mubilanzila Mayeka v Belgium (Application no 13178/03)

Sep 29, 2018, 17:31 PM
Slug : mubilanzila-mayeka-v-belgium-application-no-13178-03
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Oct 12, 2007, 09:15 AM
Article ID : 87955

(European Court of Human Rights; 12 October 2006)

After the mother had been granted refugee status in Canada, the mother's brother, who was a Dutch national, brought the 5-year-old child from Congo to Europe without appropriate travel or immigration papers, intending to arrange transport to Canada. The child was refused leave to enter Belgium and detained by the authorities; the mother's brother left the child with the Belgian immigration authorities and returned to The Netherlands. The child was detained for almost 2 months in a transit centre designed for adults. The mother was informed of the child's whereabouts and investigations were made with the Canadian authorities. Eventually the child was deported to the Congo; neither the mother nor any other relatives of the child was informed of the deportation, and, as there was no one available to meet the child in the Congo, the Congolese authorities took charge of her. Eventually the child was granted a Canadian visa and flew directly to Canada.

There had been breaches not only of Art 8, but also of Art 3 and Art 5. A child who was an illegal immigrant in a foreign country, unaccompanied by family, was in an extremely vulnerable position. The State had owed the child a duty to provide care and protection. The child's detention in a camp designed for adults amounted to inhuman treatment. The circumstances of the deportation also showed such a total lack of humanity towards the child as to amount to inhuman treatment. The effect of the detention was to separate the child from the member of the family in whose care she had been placed and who was responsible for her welfare, with the result that she became an unaccompanied foreign minor. The detention had also significantly delayed the reunification of the child with the mother. In the absence of any risk of the child seeking to evade the supervision of the Belgian authorities, her detention in a closed centre for adults had been unnecessary.

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