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
Queer(y)ing consummation: an empirical reflection on the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 and the role of consummation
Alexander Maine, Lecturer in Law, Leicester Law School, University of LeicesterKeywords: Consummation – adultery – marriage – empirical research – LGBTQConsummation and...
A v A (Return Without Taking Parent) [2021] EWHC 1439 (Fam)
(Family Division, MacDonald J, 18 May 2021)Abduction – Application for return order under Hague Convention 1980 - Art 13(b) defence – Whether mother’s allegations against the father...
Domestic Abuse Toolkit for Employers
The Insurance Charities have released an update to the Domestic Abuse Toolkit for Employers.Employers have a duty of care and a legal responsibility to provide a safe and effective work...
Two-week rapid consultation launched on remote, hybrid and in-person family hearings
The President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, has announced the launch of a two-week rapid consultation on remote, hybrid and in-person hearings in the family justice system and the...
Pension sharing orders: Finch v Baker
The Court of Appeal judgment in Finch v Baker [2021] EWCA Civ 72 was released on 28 January 2021. The judgment provides some useful guidance on not being able to get what are essentially...
View all articles
Authors

HUMAN RIGHTS: Paulik v Slovakia (Application No 10699/05)

Sep 29, 2018, 17:31 PM
Slug : paulik-v-slovakia-application-no-10699-05
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Oct 23, 2006, 04:23 AM
Article ID : 87891

(European Court of Human Rights; 10 October 2006)

Many years after the Slovakian court had ruled that the applicant was the father of the child, the applicant obtained DNA evidence which showed that he was not. It proved impossible under domestic legislation for the applicant to challenge the original court ruling, even though the child in question was now an adult, with children of her own, had provided the applicant with the DNA and supported the applicant's attempt to overturn the paternity ruling. The applicant argued that the Slovakian authorities had breached his Art 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 rights, and had discriminated against him.

The Slovakian legal system had failed to secure respect for the applicant's private life. In cases in which paternity had been presumed, rather than tested, parents were able to take legal steps to contest the paternity ruling subsequently, but the domestic law made no allowance for the specific circumstances of the applicant's case. There was no reasonable relationship of proportionality between the aim sought by the legislation and the absolute means employed.

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