Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  FUSCA v. ROMANIA

  Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible No violation of Art. 8 (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (5)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 26.05.1994 - 16969/90

  KEEGAN v. IRELAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.07.2010 - 34630/07

  In both contexts, regard must be had to the fair balance to be struck between the competing interests of the individual and of the community as a whole; in both contexts the State enjoys a certain margin of appreciation (see Keegan v. Ireland, 26 May 1994, § 49, Series A no. 290).
• EGMR, 23.09.1994 - 19823/92

  HOKKANEN v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.07.2010 - 34630/07

  This applies not only to cases dealing with the compulsory taking of children into public care and the implementation of care measures (see, inter alia, Olsson v. Sweden (no. 2), 27 November 1992, § 90, Series A no. 250), but also to cases where contact and residence disputes concerning children arise between parents and/or other members of the children's family (see, for example, Hokkanen v. Finland, 23 September 1994, § 55, Series A no. 299).
• EGMR, 27.11.1992 - 13441/87

  OLSSON c. SUÈDE (N° 2)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.07.2010 - 34630/07

  This applies not only to cases dealing with the compulsory taking of children into public care and the implementation of care measures (see, inter alia, Olsson v. Sweden (no. 2), 27 November 1992, § 90, Series A no. 250), but also to cases where contact and residence disputes concerning children arise between parents and/or other members of the children's family (see, for example, Hokkanen v. Finland, 23 September 1994, § 55, Series A no. 299).

 
• EGMR, 06.12.2007 - 39388/05

  Maumousseau und Washington ./. Frankreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.07.2010 - 34630/07

  "In addition, when difficulties appear, mainly as a result of a refusal by the parent with whom the child lives to comply with the decision [...], the appropriate authorities should then impose adequate sanctions in respect of this lack of cooperation and, whilst coercive measures against children are not desirable in this sensitive area, the use of sanctions must not be ruled out in the event of manifestly unlawful behaviour by the parent with whom the child lives" (Maumousseau and Washington v. France, no. 39388/05, § 83, ECHR 2007-XIII).
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 32842/96

  NUUTINEN v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.07.2010 - 34630/07

  In relation to the State's obligation to implement positive measures, the Court has held that Article 8 includes for parents a right that steps be taken to reunite them with their children and an obligation on the national authorities to facilitate such reunions (see, among other authorities, Ignaccolo-Zenide v. Romania, cited above, § 94; Nuutinen v. Finland, no. 32842/96, § 127, ECHR 2000-VIII, and Iglesias Gil and A.U.I. v. Spain, no. 56673/00, § 49, ECHR 2003-V).
• EGMR, 29.04.2003 - 56673/00

  IGLESIAS GIL ET A.U.I. c. ESPAGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.07.2010 - 34630/07

  In relation to the State's obligation to implement positive measures, the Court has held that Article 8 includes for parents a right that steps be taken to reunite them with their children and an obligation on the national authorities to facilitate such reunions (see, among other authorities, Ignaccolo-Zenide v. Romania, cited above, § 94; Nuutinen v. Finland, no. 32842/96, § 127, ECHR 2000-VIII, and Iglesias Gil and A.U.I. v. Spain, no. 56673/00, § 49, ECHR 2003-V).
• EGMR, 14.03.2006 - 8215/02

  D. v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 13.07.2010 - 34630/07

  The applicant may not have tried to make use of such services to improve his contacts with the child (see, mutatis mutandis, D. v. Poland (dec.), no. 8215/02), by requesting the assistance of the social services.

• EGMR, 02.02.2016 - 71776/12

  N.TS. AND OTHERS v. GEORGIA

  This also applies to cases where contact and residence disputes concerning children arise between parents and/or other members of the children's family (see Fusca v. Romania, no. 34630/07, § 34, 13 July 2010; Hromadka and Hromadkova v. Russia, no. 22909/10, § 150, 11 December 2014; and Manic v. Lithuania, no. 46600/11, § 101, 13 January 2015).
• EGMR, 03.10.2013 - 59913/11

  ZELENEVY c. RUSSIE

  Elle considère que toute inexécution prolongée du jugement et, partant, tout retard dans le retour de l'enfant auprès de sa mère ne peuvent manquer d'infliger à celui-ci un surcroît de souffrances et un plus grand traumatisme (voir Ignaccolo-Zenide, précité, et Fusca c. Roumanie, no 34630/07, § 42, 13 juillet 2010 ; dans ces affaires, le problème de l'inexécution résidait, dans une grande mesure, dans le refus d'adolescents d'être restitués à l'un de leurs parents ou de le rencontrer après une longue séparation).
• EGMR, 13.10.2011 - 45082/05

  S.I. v. SLOVENIA

  Article 8 includes for parents a right that steps be taken to reunite them with their children and an obligation on the national authorities to facilitate such reunions (see, among other authorities, Ignaccolo-Zenide v. Romania, no. 31679/96, § 94, ECHR 2000-I, and Fusca v. Romania, no. 34630/07, § 34, 13 July 2010).
• EGMR, 18.02.2014 - 22731/11

  FERNÁNDEZ CABANILLAS v. SPAIN

  While the national authorities must do their utmost to facilitate such cooperation, any obligation to apply coercion in this area must be limited, since the interests, as well as the rights and freedoms, of all concerned must be taken into account, and more particularly the best interests of the child and his or her rights under Article 8 of the Convention (see Hokkanen, cited above, § 58, and Fusca v. Romania, no. 34630/07, § 38, 13 July 2010).
• EGMR, 16.07.2015 - 10383/09

  MAMCHUR c. UKRAINE

  This applies not only to cases dealing with the compulsory taking of children into public care and the implementation of care measures, but also to cases where contact and residence disputes concerning children arise between parents and/or other members of the children's family (see Hokkanen v. Finland, 23 September 1994, § 55, Series A no. 299, and Fusca v. Romania, no. 34630/07, § 34, 13 July 2010).