L v Finland: ECHR 27 Apr 2000

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) No violation of Art. 8; No violation of Art. 13; Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings
‘the consideration of what is in the best interests of the child is of crucial importance.’

Judges:

Mr G. Ress

Citations:

[2000] ECHR 175, 25651/94, [2000] ECHR 176, [2000] 2 FLR 118, [2000] Fam Law 536, (2001) 31 EHRR 30, [2000] 3 FCR 219, 31 EHRR 30

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

CitedPayne v Payne; P v P CA 13-Feb-2001
No presumption for Mother on Relocation
The mother applied for leave to return to New Zealand taking with the parties’ daughter aged four. The father opposed the move, saying that allowing the move would infringe his and the child’s right to family life. He had been refused residence.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Children

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.165861