| Applicant name | PACHECO CASTELO |
| Applicant type | Natural person |
| Number of applicants | 1 |
| Country | Portugal |
| Application no. | 13218/21 |
| Date | 24/10/2023 |
| Judges | Tim Eicke, President, Branko Lubarda, Ana Maria Guerra Martins, |
| Institution | Court |
| Type | Judgment |
| Outcome Art. 8 | Violation |
| Reason | Unfair decision making process |
| Type of privacy | Procedural privacy; realtional privacy |
| Keywords | Fairness domestic judicial procedure |
| Facts of the case | Access to child |
| Analysis | The Court observes that the supreme court had placed preponderant weight on the mother’s interests while disregarding other factors, in particular and primarily, the child’s best interests and, secondly, the applicant’s rights as a father. In addition, it finds the decision of the Supreme Court to be contradictory when assessing the risk regarding the mother as on the one hand it downplayed that risk by affirming that it was not currently evident or that there was no evidence that it had affected the child, while on the other hand, acknowledging that risk and fealing compelled to find a safeguard, by adding that the child should live with her maternal grandmother. The Supreme Court did not explain why the child’s best interests would be better served by living with her grandmother rather than with her father. The Supreme Court did not give any weight to the child’s view as already established in the lower court’s decisions, nor was she heard by it. Consequently, it finds a violation of Article 8 of the Convention. |
| Other Article violation? | No |
| Damage awarded | The applicant’s claim for just satisfaction was not submitted within the time-limit set by the Court. Accordingly, the Court considers that there is no call to award him any sum on that account. |
| Documents | Judgment |