Strasbourg Observers

View posts from: Right to Respect for Family Life

  • Alicia Hendricks

Gruba and Others v. Russia: the ECtHR repeats its Konstantin Markin v. Russia jurisprudence but (again) misses a child-oriented perspective

October 01, 2021

By Alicia Hendricks The case of Gruba and Others v. Russia concerns the difference in entitlement to parental leave between policemen and policewomen. The European Court of Human Rights (the Court) ruled in favour of the male defendants by stating that this difference in treatment amounted to sex discrimination contrary to Article 14 (prohibition of […]

  • Helga Molbæk-Steensig

M.A. v Denmark: Is Denmark (still) a good-faith interpreter with legitimate aims?

September 21, 2021

By Helga Molbæk-Steensig What determines whether a state is a good faith interpreter? Can a state claim a generally accepted policy goal as a legitimate aim for human rights interferences if it no longer pursues that policy goal itself? What, if any, role do letters and reports from international human rights bodies play if they […]

  • Elena Patrizi

R.B. v. Estonia: The ECtHR calls for less strict procedural rules for children’s testimony

September 08, 2021

By Elena Patrizi, PhD Candidate at the Faculty of Law and affiliated with the Centre for Children’s Rights Studies, University of Geneva, Switzerland   On 22 June 2021, the Third Section of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter: ECtHR) released its judgment on the case of R.B. v. Estonia, a case concerning the effectiveness […]

  • Dr. Marianna Iliadou

Valdís Fjölnisdóttir and Others v Iceland: cross-border surrogacy and foster care. What about the best interests of the child?

June 30, 2021

By Dr Marianna Iliadou, Teaching Fellow in Medical Law and Ethics at Durham University, UK. On 18 May 2021, the Third Section of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or the Court) delivered a judgment on the contested issue of non-recognition of the parent-child relationship for a child born through cross-border surrogacy. Surrogacy is […]

  • Guest Blogger

Parents in Marginalized and Vulnerable Situations, Family Life and Children’s Best Interests: A.I. v. Italy

June 09, 2021

Dr. Gamze Erdem Türkelli is a Research Foundation (FWO) Flanders Post-Doctoral Fellow at the Law and Development Research Group, University of Antwerp* Introduction On 1 April 2021, the First Section of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) rendered its judgment in A.I. v. Italy (Application no. 70896/17). The judgment sheds light on the States Parties’ obligations under […]

  • Guest Blogger

Anti-vaxxers before the Strasbourg Court: Vavřička and Others v. the Czech Republic

June 02, 2021

By Katarzyna Ważyńska-Finck, PhD researcher at the European University Institute anda former assistant lawyer at the European Court of Human Rights. Compared to our ancestors, we are lucky to have at our disposal safe and effective vaccines against illnesses such as polio, measles or hepatitis B. To ensure that the number of immunized people is […]

  • Guest Blogger

Grandma take me home! Visiting rights of (grand)parents and Roma discrimination in Italy: two systemic problems? – Terna v. Italy

May 05, 2021

Francesco Luigi Gatta, Research Fellow, UCLouvain, EDEM The case Terna v. Italy (application no. 21052/18) concerns the non-enforcement of a grandmother’s right of access to her granddaughter, who belongs to the Roma ethnic group. It touches upon two serious issues in Italy: visiting rights and Roma discrimination. With the judgment delivered on 14 January 2021, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) […]

  • Guest Blogger

Honner v France: Damage Prevention and/or Damage Control?

January 12, 2021

By Alice Margaria (Senior Research Fellow, Department of ‘Law & Anthropology’, Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology) In 2020, an application concerning the parental rights of a co-mother was to be expected. What is surprising, however, is the ECtHR’s response. In Honner v France, the Court held that the refusal to grant contact rights to […]

  • Guest Blogger

Unuane v United Kingdom: does the Convention require “pure” proportionality?

December 23, 2020

By Lewis Graham (PhD Researcher at Pembroke College, Cambridge) The Fourth Section recently delivered its judgment in Unuane v United Kingdom, in which it found that the UK had breached Article 8 ECHR through approving the deportation of an individual without properly evaluating the impact this would have on his private and family life under […]

  • Guest Blogger

The Bitter Price of Being an Inactive Parent: Lyapin v. Russia

July 29, 2020

By Nadia Rusinova, attorney-at-law and lecturer in International private law at the Hague University On 30 June 2020 the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter: The Court) delivered its judgment on the case Ilya Lyapin v. Russia. The case addresses the divestment of parental rights from a biological father due to his inaction in exercising […]

  • Guest Blogger

Human Rights Centre submits a third party intervention in case concerning the right to family life of transgender parents and their children

July 08, 2020

Judith Vermeulen is a doctoral researcher and a member of the Law & Technology research group, the Human Rights Centre and PIXELS at Ghent University. The Human Rights Centre of Ghent University (Belgium)[1] submitted a third party intervention (TPI) before the European Court of Human Rights in the communicated case of A.M. and Others v. […]

  • Guest Blogger

(One More) Engaged Father(s) Before the ECtHR: Uzbyakov v Russia

June 11, 2020

By Alice Margaria (Research Fellow, Department of ‘Law & Anthropology’, Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology) Fathers who want to be or remain involved in their children’s lives have become frequent applicants before the ECtHR. Underlying many of their complaints are national measures reflecting a ‘conventional’ understanding of fatherhood, where paternal care is attached scant […]

  • Guest Blogger

Pedersen et al v. Norway: Progress towards child-centrism at the European Court of Human Rights?

May 28, 2020

By Katre Luhamaa and Jenny Krutzinna, researchers at the Centre for Research on Discretion and Paternalism (University of Bergen) Introduction In February this year (2020), the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR, Court) delivered two further judgments relating to the Norwegian child protection system (Hernehult v. Norway and Pedersen et al. v. Norway). In both […]

  • Guest Blogger

The Court’s first ruling on Roma’s access to safe water and sanitation in Hudorovic et al. v. Slovenia: reasons for hope and worry

April 09, 2020

This blogpost is written by Valeska David who is an Affiliated Researcher at the Human Rights Centre of Ghent University and Assistant Professor of International Law at University of Navarra. She has recently published the book ‘Cultural Difference and Economic Disadvantage in Regional Human Rights Courts: An Integrated View’ (Intersentia, 2020). On 10 March 2020, […]

  • Guest Blogger

An inch of time is an inch of gold – the time factor in child abduction related proceedings: Balbino v. Portugal

March 30, 2020

This post was written by Nadia Rusinova who is attorney-at-law and lecturer in International private law at The Hague University. On 29 January 2019 the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter: The Court) delivered its judgment on the case Simoes Balbino v. Portugal which addresses procedural delay in the context of the attribution of the exercise of parental […]

  • Laurens Lavrysen

Strand Lobben and Others v. Norway: from Age of Subsidiarity to Age of Redundancy?

October 23, 2019

In the recent judgment of Strand Lobben and Others v. Norway, the Grand Chamber found a violation of Article 8 ECHR (the right to respect for family life) on account of shortcomings in the decision-making process leading to the adoption of a boy who had been placed in foster care. The Grand Chamber in particular […]

  • Guest Blogger

Child protection and child-centrism – the Grand Chamber case of Strand Lobben and others v. Norway 2019

October 10, 2019

By Prof. Marit Skivenes, Centre for Research on Discretion and Paternalism (University of Bergen) The backdrop for the Grand Chamber case, is the dissenting Chamber judgment of 2017 – Strand Lobben vs. Norway  – about a boy that had been adopted from foster care. Here, the Chamber concluded it had not been a violation of […]

  • Guest Blogger

The protection of foster parents right to family and the best interests of the child

October 01, 2019

By Kartica van de Zon, assistant professor of Family Law, Leiden Law School, the Child Law Department On 9 April 2019, the ECtHR delivered its judgement in the case V.D and others v Russia. The case concerned a seriously disabled boy who had been in the care of his foster mother for nine years. Typically […]

  • Guest Blogger

The importance of time in child protection decisions; a commentary on Haddad v Spain

September 12, 2019

By Simona Florescu PhD fellow, Leiden Law School, the Child Law Department On 18 June 2019 the European Court of Human Rights found a violation of Article 8 of the Convention in the case of Haddad v Spain. The main reason was that the Spanish authorities did not discharge of their positive obligations to facilitate […]

  • Guest Blogger

Vladimir Ushakov V. Russia – The 1980 Hague Convention, the child’s best interests and gender biases

August 21, 2019

By Tine Van Hof, PhD researcher at the University of Antwerp  On the 18th of June 2019, the European Court of Human Rights gave judgment in the case of Vladimir Ushakov v. Russia (application no. 15122/17). The Court held by six votes to one that there has been a violation of the applicant’s right to […]

1 2 3 4