| Applicant name |
X.
|
| Applicant type |
Natural Person
|
| Country |
Belgium
|
| Decision no. |
1488/62
|
| Date |
18/12/1963
|
| Judges |
–
|
| Institution |
Commission
|
| Type |
Decision
|
| Outcome Art. 8 |
Inadmissible
|
| Reason |
Ratione materiae; Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies
|
| Type of privacy |
Family Privacy
|
| Keywords |
Access to child; horizontal relationship; positive obligation
|
| Facts of the case |
A farther is angry with the mother of their child for a number of reasons, mainly centring around the belief of the father that the mother is wilfully undermining his right to have access to their child after their divorce.
|
| Analysis |
Father wants to have criminal proceedings started against his former wife, but the European Commission makes clear that such does not fall under the scope of the Convention and that the claim must thus be rejected ratione materiae.
The Commission also makes clear that he has no right per se under Article 8 ECHR to be awarded custody over his child after his divorce.
Finally, the man submits that the government has failed to guarantee his right to access. He consequently points to a positive obligation of the state. Interestingly, the Commission does not reject such a claim on substantiative grounds, but stresses that on this point, the national remedies have not been exhausted.
|
| Documents |
Decision
|