X AND OTHERS v. SLOVENIA - 27746/22 (Art 8 - Family life - Removal of the applicant children from the first applicant, their mother, and the discontinuation of contact between them with the aim of preventing alienation from their father - Remainder inadmissible : First Section) [2024] ECHR 909 (19 December 2024)
The removal order and discontinuation of contact between the first applicant and her children were not supported by relevant and sufficient reasons, breaching the applicant children's rights under Article 8. The assignment of the case to a particular judge violated Article 6 § 1, as it was contrary to domestic law...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] ECHR 909
- Parties
- Applicant: X; Applicant: Second, Third, and Fourth Applicants (children); Respondent: Y; Respondent: Republic of Slovenia
- Jurisdiction
- European Union
- Judgment Date
- 19 December 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Human Rights Application / Judgment and Appellate Review
- Outcome
- Judgment quashed in part; case remitted for re-examination; interim orders set aside.
- Legal Topics
- Child Custody, Contact Rights, Judicial Assignment, Right to Family Life, Right to Tribunal Established by Law
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
X
Applicant
Second, Third, and Fourth Applicants (children)
Applicant
Y
Respondent
Republic of Slovenia
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Application / Judgment and Appellate Review
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether removal of applicant children and discontinuation of contact breached Article 8 (right to family life)
- 2 Whether assignment of case to particular judge breached Article 6 § 1 (right to tribunal established by law)
Ratio Decidendi
The removal order and discontinuation of contact between the first applicant and her children were not supported by relevant and sufficient reasons, breaching the applicant children's rights under Article 8. The assignment of the case to a particular judge violated Article 6 § 1, as it was contrary to domestic law and lacked objective, pre-established criteria. Higher courts failed to review whether the orders were Convention compliant, and domestic courts did not carry out an in-depth examination of the family situation or consider less severe measures.
Court Disposition
Judgment quashed in part; case remitted for re-examination; interim orders set aside.
Orders
- Remit custody and contact arrangements to first-instance court for re-examination by a different judge.
- Supplement evidence gathering with expert and welfare centre involvement.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment