Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  Z. v. POLAND

  Art. 8 MRK
  Violation of Art. 8 (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Neu Zitiert selbst (4)

• EGMR, 26.05.1994 - 16969/90

  KEEGAN v. IRELAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2010 - 34694/06

  In both the negative and positive contexts, regard must be had to the fair balance which has to be struck between the competing interests of the individual and the community, including other concerned third parties, and the State's margin of appreciation (see, amongst other authorities, Keegan v. Ireland, judgment of 26 May 1994, Series A no. 290, p. 19, § 49).
• EGMR, 24.03.1988 - 10465/83

  OLSSON v. SWEDEN (No. 1)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2010 - 34694/06

  In so doing, it must determine whether the reasons purporting to justify any measures taken with regard to an applicant's enjoyment of his right to respect for family life are relevant and sufficient (see, amongst other authorities, Olsson v. Sweden, judgment of 24 March 1988, Series A no. 130, p. 32, § 68).
• EGMR, 23.09.1994 - 19823/92

  HOKKANEN v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2010 - 34694/06

  35-36, § 90), but also to cases where contact and residence disputes concerning children arise between parents and/or other members of the children's family (for example, Hokkanen v. Finland, judgment of 23 September 1994, Series A no. 299, p. 20, § 55).
• EGMR, 27.11.1992 - 13441/87

  OLSSON c. SUÈDE (N° 2)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.04.2010 - 34694/06

  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, the Olsson v. Sweden (no. 2), judgment of 27 November 1992, Series A no. 250, pp.

• EGMR, 13.04.2023 - 25942/20

  E.K. v. LATVIA

  However, a lack of cooperation between the separated parents is not a circumstance which can in itself exempt the authorities from their positive obligations under Article 8. It rather imposes on them an obligation to take measures that would reconcile the conflicting interests of the parties, keeping in mind the paramount interests of the child (see Z. v. Poland, no. 34694/06, § 75, 20 April 2010, and G.B. v. Lithuania, no. 36137/13, § 93, 19 January 2016), which, depending on the circumstances, may override those of the parent (see Elsholz v. Germany [GC], no. 25735/94, § 50, ECHR 2000-VIII).
• EGMR, 20.09.2022 - 7833/12

  POPADIC v. SERBIA

  The fact that the parties could not agree on the modalities of the contact arrangements imposed on the authorities an obligation to take measures to reconcile the conflicting interests of the parties, keeping in mind the paramount interests of the child (see, in general, Neulinger and Shuruk v. Switzerland [GC], no. 41615/07, § 135, ECHR 2010, and Z. v. Poland, no. 34694/06, § 75, 20 April 2010).
• EGMR, 28.09.2023 - 4065/21

  BELUCH v. POLAND

  However, a lack of cooperation between parents who have separated is not a circumstance which can of itself exempt the authorities from their positive obligations under Article 8; it rather imposes on the authorities an obligation to take measures that would reconcile the conflicting interests of the parties, keeping in mind the paramount interests of the child (see Z. v. Poland, no. 34694/06, § 75, 20 April 2010, and G.B. v. Lithuania, no. 36137/13, § 93, 19 January 2016).