Communicated on 25 January 2021
Published on 15 February 2021
FIRST SECTION
Application no. 32662/20
Martin Ariel VASSALLO
against Hungary
lodged on 29 July 2020
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns delays in dealing with the applicant’s request for returning his children to their habitual place of residence (Spain) in accordance with the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (“Hague Convention”).
The children were retained in Hungary by their mother, who refused to bring them back and informed the applicant about this on 17 January 2017.
On 15 February 2017 the applicant lodged proceedings with the Court of Ibiza for a provisional ruling on the custody arrangements.
On 31 January 2018 the Court of Ibiza granted provisional custody of the children to the father.
In parallel with the Spanish proceedings, on 15 February 2017, the applicant filed an application for the return of his children to Spain that was transmitted to the Hungarian authorities.
The applicant had to initiate three set of return proceedings under the Hague Convention before the Hungarian courts, as the first two sets of proceedings terminated with the decision of the Constitutional Court to annul the lower-level judicial decisions for the violation of the mother’s right to a fair trial under the Hungarian Fundamental Law.
Meanwhile, on 21 January 2019, the Court of Ibiza considered that the mother’s removal of the children to Hungary was unlawful and ordered the immediate return of the children. On 30 October 2019 the Brussels IIa certificate was sent to the Hungarian authorities.
On 22 June 2020 the first instance court in the third set of proceedings in Hungary ordered the return of the children to Spain, at which point the proceedings were ongoing for more than three years before the Hungarian courts. It is unclear whether the first instance decision in the third set of proceedings has been enforced or challenged.
The applicant’s complaint about the delays in dealing with the case; the lack of access to his children during the relevant period; the misapplication of the Hague Convention by the Constitutional Court; and the non-enforcement of the respective decisions of the Spanish courts raises issues under Article 8 of the Convention.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Do the facts of the case disclose a violation of Article 8 of the Convention? In particular, were the proceedings in Hungary compatible with the procedural requirements of Article 8 of the Convention (see, for example, X v. Latvia [GC], no. 27853/09, § 102 or Pisică v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 23641/17, §§ 63-81, 29 October 2019)?
2. The parties are invited to inform the Court about any new developments of the case, notably about any decisions issued by the courts in Hungary, and to submit copies thereof.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy