Published on 28 July 2025
FIFTH SECTION
Application no. 8122/24
F.W.
against Spain
lodged on 16 March 2024
communicated on 7 July 2025
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns the placement into care of the applicant’s children.
The applicant is a Syrian woman. She arrived in Spain with her family in 2017 in the framework of a resettlement programme from Türkiye and was granted subsidiary protection.
She has four children: a girl born in 2010, a boy born in 2011, who has a disability, a boy born in 2016, and a girl born in November 2018. In December 2020 she divorced from her husband, who had been convicted of gender violence.
According to a certificate issued in 2019 she has a 79% disability due to a functional limitation in lower and upper limbs.
On 24 May 2018 the Guardianship Commission of Madrid declared the applicant’s three older children in a situation of abandonment (desamparo) and placed them under the provisional guardianship (tutela) of the regional government and under the custody (guarda) of the director of a protection centre.
The measure was confirmed by the Guardianship Commission on 16 December 2020, ruling that the older child should stay in residential care, while the two younger children were to be placed in permanent family placement.
The Guardianship Commission relied, inter alia, on the applicant’s limitations due to her disability, the need of support by a third person and the lack of adapted and stable housing, as well as the children’s young age and the disability of the second child.
The applicant’s appeals against those decisions were dismissed by the Madrid Court of First Instance No. 75 and the Madrid Audiencia Provincial.
The Supreme Court declared the appeal on points of law inadmissible considering that there was no legal interest (interés casacional). On 16 November 2023 the Constitutional Court declared the amparo appeal inadmissible, observing no constitutional significance.
The applicant alleges a violation of her right to family life under Article 8 of the Convention, claiming that the domestic court’s interpretation of domestic law was unreasonable and that the interference with her family life was not necessary. She further alleges a violation of Article 14 of the Convention, in relation to Article 8, stating that the domestic authorities did not properly assess the influence of her disability on her capacity to take care of her children, that she has been separated from the children because of her disability, and that the relevant decisions were based on stereotypes.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Has there been an interference with the applicant’s right to respect for her family life within the meaning of Article 8 § 1 of the Convention?
If so, was that interference in accordance with the law and necessary in terms of Article 8 § 2?
2. Has the applicant suffered discrimination on the ground of her disability and of her child’s disability, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention read in conjunction with Article 8?
The parties are requested to submit updated information concerning the current situation of the applicant and her children, in particular any developments regarding their guardianship and/or custody, including relevant documents.