CEDHCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 3 novembre 2021
- ECLI
- ECLI:CEDH:001-213747
- Date
- 3 novembre 2021
- Publication
- 3 novembre 2021
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 } .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 } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .sCDD55F3 { margin-left:14.17pt; padding-left:3.68pt; font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt }   Published on 22 November 2021   THIRD SECTION Application no. 51966/20 Andrey Aleksandrovich LUKYANENKO against Russia and 3 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 3 November 2021   SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASES The applications concern disputes between the divorced applicants and their ex-wives regarding their common children’s place of residence. In each of the cases domestic courts found in favour of the children’s mothers referring to Principle 6 of the United Nations 1959 Declaration of the Rights of the Child, which provides that a child of tender years should not, save in exceptional circumstances, be separated from his or her mother. According to the courts, no “exceptional circumstances” warranting the separation of the children from their mothers were shown by the applicants. The final judgments in the disputes in applications nos. 259/21, 24092/21 and 51966/20 were delivered by the Supreme Court of Russia on 8   September, 16 and 21 October 2020 respectively.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a violation of the applicants’ right to respect for their family life, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention? Did the domestic courts give sufficient reasons for their decisions to give the residence orders to the mothers of the applicants’ children? In particular, did they conduct an in‑depth examination of the entire family situation and a whole series of relevant factors, in particular factors of a factual, emotional, psychological, material and medical nature, and did they make a balanced and reasonable assessment of the respective interests of each person, with a constant concern for determining what the best solution would be for the children (see Petrov and X v. Russia , no.   23608/16, §§ 98-100, 23 October 2018, with further references)?   2.     Did each of the applicants exhaust effective domestic remedies, as required by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention, in respect of their complaints of discrimination? If so, has there been a violation of Article   14 of the Convention, read in conjunction with Article 8 on account of the applicants’ discrimination on the ground of their male sex?   APPENDIX No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence   Represented by     51966/20 Lukyanenko v. Russia 08/11/2020 Andrey Aleksandrovich LUKYANENKO 1980 Khabarovsk -   259/21 Skvortsov v.   Russia 24/11/2020 Yegor Sergeyevich SKVORTSOV 1983 Yarovoye K. TEREKHOV   24092/21 Kurlikovskiy v. Russia 16/04/2021 Maksim Viktorovich KURLIKOVSKIY 1985 Yekaterinburg -    Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
- Date
- 3 novembre 2021
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CEDH:001-213747
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral
- Résumé officiel