Continuity of Parental Responsibility in Child Abduction Cases: Lesson Learned from the Case of <i>Z. v. Croatia</i>
The new ECtHR decision in the case of <i>Z. v. Croatia</i> suggests that the rule of parental responsibility acquired <i>ex lege</i> is not always easy to implement in child abduction cases. The case primarily raised the question of determining whether the removal or retentio...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2023-09-01
|
| Series: | Laws |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/12/5/82 |
| _version_ | 1797573214717607936 |
|---|---|
| author | Mirela Župan Martina Drventić Barišin |
| author_facet | Mirela Župan Martina Drventić Barišin |
| author_sort | Mirela Župan |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The new ECtHR decision in the case of <i>Z. v. Croatia</i> suggests that the rule of parental responsibility acquired <i>ex lege</i> is not always easy to implement in child abduction cases. The case primarily raised the question of determining whether the removal or retention of the child is wrongful in situations when the unmarried left-behind father does not have the <i>ex lege</i> right to parental responsibility under the law of the country of habitual residence, but he has acquired it under the law of the country in which he and the child had their previous habitual residence. In addition, the case of <i>Z. v. Croatia</i> raises the issue of renvoi, the habitual residence of children whose lifestyle involves frequent moving with their parents, as well as the issue of the need for thorough justification of the court decision. The identified difficulties showed the need to clearly elaborate and determine the interrelationship between Article 3 of the Child Abduction Convention and Article 16(3) of the Child Protection Convention, as well as the necessity to evaluate domestic legislative solutions and the practice of the national authorities that have led to the determination of violation in the present case. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-10T21:06:45Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-43ff91e6099c4edf9bd538e26323dea8 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2075-471X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-10T21:06:45Z |
| publishDate | 2023-09-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Laws |
| spelling | doaj.art-43ff91e6099c4edf9bd538e26323dea82023-11-19T17:05:07ZengMDPI AGLaws2075-471X2023-09-011258210.3390/laws12050082Continuity of Parental Responsibility in Child Abduction Cases: Lesson Learned from the Case of <i>Z. v. Croatia</i>Mirela Župan0Martina Drventić Barišin1Faculty of Law, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, 31000 Osijek, CroatiaFaculty of Law, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, 31000 Osijek, CroatiaThe new ECtHR decision in the case of <i>Z. v. Croatia</i> suggests that the rule of parental responsibility acquired <i>ex lege</i> is not always easy to implement in child abduction cases. The case primarily raised the question of determining whether the removal or retention of the child is wrongful in situations when the unmarried left-behind father does not have the <i>ex lege</i> right to parental responsibility under the law of the country of habitual residence, but he has acquired it under the law of the country in which he and the child had their previous habitual residence. In addition, the case of <i>Z. v. Croatia</i> raises the issue of renvoi, the habitual residence of children whose lifestyle involves frequent moving with their parents, as well as the issue of the need for thorough justification of the court decision. The identified difficulties showed the need to clearly elaborate and determine the interrelationship between Article 3 of the Child Abduction Convention and Article 16(3) of the Child Protection Convention, as well as the necessity to evaluate domestic legislative solutions and the practice of the national authorities that have led to the determination of violation in the present case.https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/12/5/82child abductionparental responsibility acquired <i>ex lege</i>habitual residence<i>renvoi</i><i>Z. v. Croatia</i>Child Abduction Convention |
| spellingShingle | Mirela Župan Martina Drventić Barišin Continuity of Parental Responsibility in Child Abduction Cases: Lesson Learned from the Case of <i>Z. v. Croatia</i> Laws child abduction parental responsibility acquired <i>ex lege</i> habitual residence <i>renvoi</i> <i>Z. v. Croatia</i> Child Abduction Convention |
| title | Continuity of Parental Responsibility in Child Abduction Cases: Lesson Learned from the Case of <i>Z. v. Croatia</i> |
| title_full | Continuity of Parental Responsibility in Child Abduction Cases: Lesson Learned from the Case of <i>Z. v. Croatia</i> |
| title_fullStr | Continuity of Parental Responsibility in Child Abduction Cases: Lesson Learned from the Case of <i>Z. v. Croatia</i> |
| title_full_unstemmed | Continuity of Parental Responsibility in Child Abduction Cases: Lesson Learned from the Case of <i>Z. v. Croatia</i> |
| title_short | Continuity of Parental Responsibility in Child Abduction Cases: Lesson Learned from the Case of <i>Z. v. Croatia</i> |
| title_sort | continuity of parental responsibility in child abduction cases lesson learned from the case of i z v croatia i |
| topic | child abduction parental responsibility acquired <i>ex lege</i> habitual residence <i>renvoi</i> <i>Z. v. Croatia</i> Child Abduction Convention |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/12/5/82 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT mirelazupan continuityofparentalresponsibilityinchildabductioncaseslessonlearnedfromthecaseofizvcroatiai AT martinadrventicbarisin continuityofparentalresponsibilityinchildabductioncaseslessonlearnedfromthecaseofizvcroatiai |