CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 25 mai 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 25 May 2018   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 3443/18 Ann-Katrin KÖHLER against Germany lodged on 10 January 2018 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant was born in the former German Democratic Republic and taken into care by the then competent authorities. After the German reunification and the applicant attaining full age, she was adopted by her foster mother. Some years later, after having found out about the particular circumstances of being taken into care and the unlawfulness of that order, she requested an annulment of her adoption. The family courts refused her request and her complaint before the Berlin Constitutional Court was to no avail. The applicant complained under Article 8 of the Convention about the refusal of the domestic courts to annul her adoption. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Has the applicant exhausted all effective domestic remedies, as required by Article   35 §   1 of the Convention?   In particular, was a constitutional complaint before the Federal Constitutional Court against the decision of the Berlin Constitutional Court an effective remedy within the meaning of Article   35 §   1 of the Convention?   2.     Has there been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention as a result of the refusal of the applicant’s request to have her own adoption annulled?   In particular, were the time limits of Article 1762 § 2 of the German Civil Code ( Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch ) and their application in the present case proportionate to the aims pursued?