CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 18 novembre 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 } .sB24F5E38 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Communicated on 18 November 2020 Published on 7 December 2020   SECOND SECTION Application no. 53502/19 Marina MOGLAN against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 3 October 2019 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the delays in dealing with the applicant’s request of returning her children to their habitual place of residence in accordance with the Hague Convention on   the Civil Aspects of   International Child Abduction. They were taken to the Republic of Moldova by their father, who refused to bring them back. The applicant’s request to treat the case on a priority basis was rejected. Under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the applicant complains of the lengthy period during which she was deprived of contact with her children (the courts took two and a half years to decide; it is unclear whether the final judgment has been enforced). The applicant’s complaint about the delays in dealing with the case and the lack of access to her children during the relevant period raises an issue under Article 8 of the Convention (family life).   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Do the facts of the case reveal a violation of Article 8 of the Convention? In particular, were the proceedings in the Republic of Moldova compatible with the procedural requirements of Article 8 of the Convention (see Pisică v. the Republic of Moldova , no. 23641/17, §§ 63-81, 29 October 2019)?