Information Note on the Court’s case-law No.
June 1998
Bronda v. Italy - 22430/93
Judgment 9.6.1998
Article 8
Article 8-1
Respect for family life
Failure to return a child to its original family contrary to decision of a court of appeal: no violation
[This summary is extracted from the Court’s official reports (Series A or Reports of Judgments and Decisions). Its formatting and structure may therefore differ from the Case-Law Information Note summaries.]
I.ARTICLE 8 OF THE CONVENTION
Existence of family ties between applicants and their granddaughter coming within notion of family life within meaning of Article 8: not disputed.
A.Whether there had been an interference
Recapitulation of Court’s case-law.
Existence of interference with applicants’ right to respect for their family life: not contested.
B.Whether interference was justified
Recapitulation of Court’s case-law.
1. “In accordance with the law”
Wording of relevant provisions (Article 333 of Civil Code and Article 373 of Code of Civil Procedure) was rather general and national authorities had a wide measure of discretion, in particular to determine what measures were necessary for protection of child – impossible in that sphere to lay down legal rules with total precision – safeguards against arbitrary interference were provided by fact that way in which norms were applied was subject to review by courts – measures taken in case before it had been in accordance with law – parties and Commission agreed on that point.
2. Legitimate aim
Provisions concerned had been applied in order to protect child – no reason to consider that domestic courts had relied on them with aim of estranging S. from her original family – judges had been guided by what was in S.’s interest and was necessary to ensure her mental development.
Interference pursued a legitimate aim.
3. “Necessary in a democratic society”
Recapitulation of Court’s case-law.
Court satisfied that judicial decisions to leave S. with foster parents had been based on reasons that were not only relevant but also sufficient – domestic courts had relied throughout on thorough assessments of psychiatric experts and on reports prepared by social workers after each meeting between S. and her natural family.
Court attached special weight to overriding interest of child which, in case before Court, outweighed her grandparents’ interest.
Conclusion: no violation (unanimously).
II.ARTICLE 13 OF THE CONVENTION
Applicants submitted that they had not had an effective remedy available before a national authority to challenge stay of execution of Court of Appeal’s judgment: not necessary to examine complaint.
© Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights
This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.
Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy