CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 1 juillet 2020

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } Communicated on 1 July 2020 Published on 20 July 2020   SECOND SECTION Application no. 25450/20 T.A. and Others against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 29 June 2020 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the transfer of the third applicant (N.) from the custody of his grandparents (the first and second applicants) to that of his biological father. The applicants claim that the third applicant has several serious illnesses and some development problems; that he is in need of constant care and medical treatment and that he cannot go to school. He has seen his father seven times in the five years after his birth. A number of medical, psychological and social welfare reports advised against the transfer of custody. According to the reports, such transfer would not serve to the best interests of the child in view of the strong bond created between him and his grandparents as well as of his fragility. The domestic courts decided to transfer the third applicant to the custody of his biological father. The applicants complain under Article 8 of the Convention that the courts were not guided by the best interest of the child when ordering N.’s transfer into the care of his biological father.     QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicants’ right to respect for their private and family life, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention, in the present case? In particular, did the courts sufficiently take into account the third applicant’s best interests while ordering his transfer from his grandparents (the first and the second applicants) to his biological father (see Strand Lobben and Others v. Norway [GC], no. 37283/13, § 207, 10   September 2019)?”