CEDHCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 16 mars 2016
- ECLI
- ECLI:CEDH:001-161924
- Date
- 16 mars 2016
- Publication
- 16 mars 2016
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulRésumé structuré
version préliminaireFaits
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Procédure
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Question juridique
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Solution
source officielleCommunicated
Résumé généré automatiquement — à vérifier avec la décision originale.
Analyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 16 March 2016   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 11308/16 Mo-Aydah TLAPAK and Noah TLAPAK against Germany lodged on 24 February 2016 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the withdrawal of the applicants’ rights to decide where their son should live ( Aufenthaltsbestimmungsrecht ), and to take decisions regarding the son’s health ( Gesundheitssorge ) and schooling. The applicants are members of the Twelve Tribes church ( Zwölf Stämme ) and lived, with their son, born in 2012, in a community of the church in Bavaria. The domestic courts, based on the reasonable risk that the son would be subjected to birching, withdrew parts of child custody and transferred those rights to the competent youth office. On 16 August 2015 the Federal Constitutional Court declined to admit the applicants’ constitutional complaint for adjudication without providing reasons (1   BvR   1467/15, served on 27 August 2015). The applicants complain mainly under Article 8 about the allegedly disproportionate decision of the domestic courts, the insufficient factual foundation of the decision and the unfairness of the proceedings before the family courts. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicants’ right to respect for their family life, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention?Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
- Date
- 16 mars 2016
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CEDH:001-161924
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral
- Résumé officiel