Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'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
Hundreds of thousands of companies worldwide fall victims to hackers every year. Is your firm one of them?
SPONSORED CONTENT Image source: Information is beautifulYou and other lawyers and legal assistants in your firm likely have accounts on the hacked websites listed in the image above. If a hacker...
New complaints handling guide offers advice to local authorities
The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman is today issuing new guidance on effective complaint handling for local authorities.Based on previous documents, the new guide offers practical,...
EU laws continue until at least 2038 and beyond
The UK left the EU on 31 January 2020.  But in matters of law it fully leaves on 31 December 2020.  But EU laws will continue to apply, and be applied, in the English family courts from 1...
Family Law Awards winners announced in virtual awards ceremony
The winners of the Family Law Awards 2020 were announced at 4pm during a much-anticipated virtual awards ceremony. Over the past ten years, the Family Law Awards has recognised the leading players in...
Behaviour-based divorces still merit close consideration
Some recent cases illustrate the evidential and procedural issues involved in dealing with proofs on the merits of divorce, which are worth considering even though most cases may conclude on a...
View all articles
Authors

PATERNITY: Tavli v Turkey (Application No 11449/02)

Sep 29, 2018, 17:38 PM
Slug : tavland-305-v-turkey-application-no-11449-02
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Nov 21, 2006, 04:23 AM
Article ID : 88947

(European Court of Human Rights; 9 November 2006)

The mother's husband disputed his paternity of the child immediately after the birth of the child. The results of the blood test suggested that the husband could possibly have been the father, and on that basis the court refused to overturn the presumption of paternity. After DNA testing became available, the husband was able to establish conclusively that he was not the father of the child, but he was unable to have the previous decision rectified, because the domestic court held that scientific progress could not be used as a ground to reopen the proceedings.

The State had not struck a fair balance between the protection of legal certainty of family relationships and the husband's right to have the legal presumption of paternity reviewed in the light of conclusive biological evidence. The domestic courts should interpret existing legislation in the light of scientific progress and its social repercussions. There had been a breach of Art 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950.

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