CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 15 juillet 2021

.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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 9 August 2021   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 1461/21 R.A. against Norway lodged on 18 December 2020 communicated on 15 July 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns proceedings relating to the applicant’s request to have a care order in respect of her child, born in 2009, lifted. The proceedings, in which the authorities refused the applicant’s request and imposed limitations on her right to contact with the child, ended with a decision of the Supreme Court’s Appeals Committee of 25 June 2020. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for her family life, contrary to Article   8 of the Convention?   2.     With a particular view to the situation as concerned participation of experts in the decision-making process, and notably that the applicant’s request that an expert be appointed was refused, was the decision-making process fair and conducted so as to ensure that all views and interests of the applicant were duly taken into account (see Strand Lobben and Others , cited above, §§ 222 and 225)? Do any separate issues arise on this point in respect of the applicant’s right to a fair hearing in the determination of her civil rights and obligations, in accordance with Article   6 §   1 of the Convention?   The Government are requested to submit to the Court the District Court’s decision of 24 May 2019, in which her request to have an expert appointed was refused, and the High Court’s decision of 19 July 2019, in which her appeal against that decision was dismissed, as well as any other decisions that may exist with regard to the question of the domestic court’s appointing an expert in the course of the proceedings complained of.