HC/E/TR 1015
Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos (TEDH)
Francia
Turquía
17 February 2009
Definitiva
Cuestiones relativas a la restitución
Solicitud desestimada
-
The mother alleged a breach of Article 6(1) of the ECHR in light of the excessive period of time which had elapsed during the civil proceedings. She did not however specify the time period to be considered. The Court held that the period to be considered, which included the enforcement of the custody order, ran from 13 February 1997 to 15 June 2005.
However, it noted that, within this period, delays amounting to 3 years and 1 month were due to the mother. The Court held that the remaining period of 5 years and 3 months appeared reasonable given that the case had involved international collaboration and three levels of court. Whilst the case may not have appeared particularly complex at the outset, it became so as a result of the difficulties encountered during the enforcement stage.
The Court noted that whilst expedition was required in the handling of custody matters there had been no significant period of inactivity on the part of the Turkish authorities. Additionally, it was relevant that the mother had not advised the authorities of her meeting with the father in 2004. In the light of these factors the Court concluded that there had been no violation of Article 6(1).
The mother further argued that the failure to enforce the custody order led to a breach of the right to family life of both her and the child under Article 8 of the ECHR. The Court reiterated the core principles applicable in custody cases. In particular, it noted that the positive obligations which Art. 8 imposed on Contracting States had to be interpreted in the light of the 1980 Hague Convention.
The decisive issue was whether the national authorities had taken all the steps that could reasonably be expected of them. The Court concluded that they had. The primary problem had been the disappearance of the father and in this regard it was relevant that the mother had not divulged her meeting with the latter in 2004. There had therefore been no breach of Article 8.