CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 22 avril 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .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 } Published on 10 May 2021   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 45174/20 Nenad FILIĆ against North Macedonia lodged on 6 October 2020 communicated on 22 April 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns administrative proceedings in which the applicant (a Croatian national residing in Croatia) requested the authorities of the respondent State to regulate his contact rights with his daughter (a minor who lives with her mother in the respondent State and has a double nationality). According to the applicant, the mother obstructed his contacts with the child. In 2017 he brought administrative proceedings before the competent authorities of the respondent State seeking regularisation of his contact rights. On 7 August 2020, after a remittal, the Social Care Centre (“the Centre”) issued a decision in this regard, and on 20 August 2020 it issued an enforcement order ( налог за извршување ). On 21 August 2020 the Centre discontinued the enforcement proceedings and, after a remittal, on 11   December 2020 it rendered a new decision, which was upheld by the relevant Ministry on 18 February 2021. The applicant claims that since 2017 he saw his child on nine occasions, each time for only a couple of hours. He complains under Articles 6, 8 and 13 of the Convention that the domestic authorities failed to assist him in his efforts to see his child.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has the applicant exhausted all effective remedies, as required by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention?   2.     Has there been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention? In particular, has the State ensured the applicant’s regular contact with his daughter? If not, has the applicant suffered a breach of his right to respect for his family life as a consequence?   3.     Has there been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, does the non-enforcement of the Centre’s decisions of 2 February 2018 and 7 August 2020, specifying the applicant’s contact right with his daughter, amount to a breach of this provision?   4.     Did the applicant have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy for his complaints under Articles 6 and 8, as required by Article 13 of the Convention?   5.     The Government are invited to inform the Court if an appeal against the Centre’s decision of 7 August 2020 has been lodged and/or if it has become final. If an appeal has been lodged, the Government are invited to submit to the Court the relevant decisions following the appeal. If it has become final, the Government are invited to inform the Court if it is still in force.