Recherche de décisions

The case concerned a British father and Polish mother who had a child in 2013. The family lived in the United Kingdom. The mother took the child to Poland for a holiday in August 2018 and did not return to the UK, without the agreement of the father. 

In February 2019 the Łódź Regional Court in Poland held that the mother had wrongfully retained the child in Poland and ordered that she be returned to the UK within two weeks.

In July 2019 the Warsaw Court of Appeal dismissed the mother’s appeal against that order, rendering it final and enforceable. She later lodged a cassation appeal but this was also dismissed in 2020

In September 2019, at the father’s request, the Łódź Regional Court ordered that the child be forcibly removed from her mother’s care and handed over to the father by a court-appointed guardian.

The guardian and father went to the address of the maternal grandparents but were unable to find the child or her mother. They were informed she had stopped attending kindergarten a month earlier. The Regional Court ordered the police to establish the child’s whereabouts.

In the months and years that followed there were many delays in proceedings. Between the start of the enforcement proceedings and September 2021, the police inspected the mother’s last known address on thirty‑one occasions. When the officers did encounter the child they did not take any concrete action aimed at enforcing the return order. 

In March 2020 the applicant applied to the Polish Minister of Justice under the Brussels II bis Regulation, seeking execution of the decision of the Family Court at Peterborough. In May 2020 the Piotrków Trybunalski District Court held that it did not have jurisdiction to examine the matter and transferred the case to the Łódź Regional Court, which, on an unknown date, transferred the case back to the District Court. 

The father argued that his Article 8 rights had been violated by the non-enforcement of the return order.

Violation of Article 8, the domestic authorities had failed to take all necessary steps to facilitate the execution of the return order as could reasonably be demanded in the circumstances of the case. 

European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)

The Court observed that they must determine whether the Polish authorities took all the necessary adequate steps to facilitate the enforcement of the decisions related to the return of the child.

The Court found that, though there were no unreasonable delays in the first weeks of proceedings, as time went on there were periods of relative inactivity with subsequent actions or administrative delays of several weeks or even months. Several aspects of the case also raised doubts as to whether the authorities acted with due diligence, such as failing to verify in advance basic information or repeatedly taking measures which had already proved ineffective or which were likely to fail from the outset. The police did not appear to have any specific strategy or orders as to the course of action in the event of finding the child and the authorities did not seem to have procedures in place to enable them to cooperate effectively. 

The Court acknowledged that the difficulties in enforcing the return order were mainly caused by the mother’s hindrance. However, it was held that this did explain the shortcomings described above, most of which were undeniably the responsibility of the domestic authorities. 

The Court concluded that, notwithstanding the domestic authorities’ efforts over almost three years, they failed to take all necessary steps to facilitate the execution of the return order as could reasonably be demanded in the circumstances of the case. This, in turn, amounted to a breach of the applicant’s right to respect for his family life.