CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 13 septembre 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .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 } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 4 October 2021   FIRST SECTION Application no. 12141/16 Péter Lászlo HORVATOVICH against Hungary lodged on 29 February 2016 communicated on 13 September 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the alleged failure of the Hungarian authorities to take effective steps to enforce the applicant’s contact with his daughter for a period of about three years, until his daughter reached the age of majority and all proceedings were discontinued. The applicant invokes Article 8 of the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for his family life, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention? In particular, have the authorities fulfilled their positive obligations under Article 8 to ensure the applicant’s access to his child and proper exercise of his parental responsibility (see Cavani v. Hungary , no. 5493/13, 28 October 2014; Ónodi v.   Hungary , no. 38647/09, 30 May 2017; and Prizzia v. Hungary , no.   20255/12, 11 June 2013)?   2.     The parties are invited to inform the Court about any new developments of the case, notably about any decisions issued by the authorities in Hungary, and to submit copies thereof.