scholarly journals Access Rights as a Way to Communicate with a Child

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-16
Author(s):  
Maria V. Gromozdina

The article deals with issues related to the exercise of parental access rights as a way of communicating with the child. A parent who claims to exercise the right of access is a separately residing parent and, as a rule, a foreign citizen. The implementation of the right of access is related to the application of the Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, 1980. In this connection, the author investigates the problems of application of the right of access by the Russian courts in solving family disputes related to upbringing of children. The situation is analyzed as to the possibility of a broad interpretation of the concept of "access rights", taking into account established international practice. The problem of a misunderstanding of the essence of access rights and the related limited application of the Convention's provisions are identified. The author is of the view that the rights of access and the procedure for communication with the child (in case of separation of parents) are independent legal institutions and do not replace each other. Comparative legal analysis confirms the author's conclusions, which are justified by examples of court practice. The choice of the method of protection of parental rights is determined by the person applying for protection and cannot be changed by the court in violation of the plaintiff's rights. Thus, the conclusion is made that it is necessary to analyze the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights in order to properly apply the Convention.

2015 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 270-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Keller ◽  
Corina Heri

In its case law on international child abduction, the European Court of Human Rights (ecthr) seeks to interpret the European Convention on Human Rights (echr) in conformity with the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Both instruments safeguard the best interests of abducted children, but in different ways. This article explores the progress made by the ecthr in harmonising the conflict between the Hague Convention and Article 8 echr. While the ecthr’s approach to the abducted child’s best interests in Neulinger and Shuruk v. Switzerland was met with strong criticism, the Court seems to have found a viable approach in X. v. Latvia. The ecthr’s current tactic allows it to continue its dialogue with national authorities and international bodies by imposing procedural requirements, thereby contributing to a harmonised approach appropriate to the best interests of abducted children without negatively impacting the functioning of the Hague Convention.


Author(s):  
Protsenko Iryna

The Hague Convention on Civil Law Aspects of International Child Abduction in 1980 introduced a mechanism for resolving issues related to the illegal export or maintenance of children by persons closely related to them. According to this mechanism, executive and judicial authorities must take measures to quickly return the child to the state of his usual place of residence. However, such a return may be refused if there are circumstances specified in the 1980 Convention. One of these is the court's identification of the child’s objections to his return, however, provided that the child has reached an age and level of maturity at which his opinion should be taken into account. Therefore, the court of Ukraine finds out the opinion of the child only if he considers that he has reached the required age and level of maturity. However, the abstractness of the wording of this circumstance leads to the fact that when considering return cases in Ukrainian courts, the child’s opinion is often not heard unreasonably (for example, if the court considers the child’s age insufficient to clarify his opinion, or because the defendant does not insist on hearing the views of the child, or because the parties fail to provide evidence that the child has reached the required age and level of maturity). In our opinion, the courts, in order to avoid such errors, should more actively implement the stipulated in Art. 13 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine the right, on its own initiative, to collect evidence regarding the subject of the dispute, in particular, by appointing a psychological examination aimed at determining the level of development of the child. Clarification of the views of the child should also be carried out with mandatory consideration of the provisions of Article 12 of the 1989 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which governs the right of a child to be heard. At the same time, it is worth introducing into the judicial practice of Ukraine the approaches enshrined in the Comments of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child of General Order № 12 (2009) “The Right of the Child to be Heard”, in particular, related to assessing the child’s ability to express his thoughts


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 18-21
Author(s):  
Natalya V. Kravchuk ◽  

The paper analyses provisions of Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction with regard to a principle of the best interests of the child. The jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights on the best interests of the child dictates they should be interpreted broadly and cannot be identified by the application of the legal presumption. There is therefore a potential conflict between this reading and a narrow interpretation of this notion by the Hague convention according to which the best interest of the child in the case of international abduction is to return to the state of habitual residence. To secure the best interests of the child while applying Hague convention it is necessary to take into consideration respective international standards.


2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (90) ◽  
pp. 189-205
Author(s):  
Radmila Dragišić

In this paper, the author explores the sources of European Union Law that regulate one segment of parental responsibility - the right of access to a child. The focal point of research is the transition from the conventional (interstate) regulation of judicial cooperation in marital disputes and parental responsibility issues to the regulation enacted by the European Union institutions, with specific reference to the Brussels II bis Regulation. First, the author briefly points out to its relationship with other relevant international law sources regulating this subject matter: the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction; the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Cooperation in the Field of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children; and other international sources of law. Then, the author examines in more detail its relationship with the Brussels II bis recast Regulation, which will be applicable as of 1 August 2022. In addition, the paper includes an analysis of the first case in which the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) decided on the application of the Brussels II bis Regulation, at the request of granparents to exercise the right of access to the child. On the issue of determining the competent court which has jurisdiction to decide on how this right shall be exercised, the CJEU had to decide whether the competent court is determined on the basis of the Brussels II bis Regulation or on the basis of national Private International Law rules. This paper is useful for the professional and scientific community because it deals (inter alia) with the issue of justification of adopting a special source of law at the EU level, which would regulate the issue of mutual enforcement of court decisions on the right of access to the child. This legal solution was proposed by the Republic of France, primarily guided by the fundamental right of the child to have contact with both parents.


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 671
Author(s):  
Carmen Azcárraga Monzonís

Resumen: Sustracción internacional a España de menor residente en Suiza en aplicación del Con­venio de La Haya de 1980 sobre los aspectos civiles de la sustracción internacional de menores. Discre­pancia sobre la residencia habitual del menor. No se aprecian motivos de no retorno.Palabras clave: sustracción internacional de menores, Convenio de La Haya sobre sustracción, Convenio de La Haya sobre responsabilidad parental y protección de menores, residencia habitualAbstract: International abduction to Spain of a minor residing in Switzerland under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction of 1980. Discrepancy about the habi­tual residence of the minor. No grounds for return denial are appreciated.Keywords: international child abduction, Hague Convention on Child Abduction, Hague Conven­tion on Parental Responsibility and Measures of the Protection of Children, habitual residence


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document