CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 20 décembre 2019

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s55E56BCC { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:8pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s944BDE53 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:36pt } .s315650A1 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } Communicated on 20 December 2019   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 7515/16 Daniel-Nicolae NIȚULESCU against Romania lodged on 28 January 2016   SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE   The application concerns the dismissal by a final judgment of 22   October   2015 delivered by the Mehedinți County Court of the proceedings brought by the applicant seeking to challenge his paternity of his minor son on the grounds that: (i) none of the medical documents submitted by him proved that he was physically unable to conceive, and (ii)   the first-instance court had failed to take positive action either to ensure that the applicant’s former wife complied with the court’s order to submit herself and the child to a DNA test or to ask the applicant to submit additional evidence in support of his claim. Relying on Article 8 of the Convention the applicant complained about a breach of his rights to private and family life because he was unable to find out whether he was his son’s biological father as his wife and child refused to undergo the DNA test ordered by the domestic courts during the proceedings. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a breach of the applicant’s right to respect for his private and family life contrary to Article 8 of the Convention following the dismissal by the domestic courts of the proceedings brought by him seeking to challenge his paternity of his minor son?