CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 24 mai 2022

.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 13 June 2022   SECOND SECTION Application no. 21190/21 Sergiu ZMEU against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 30 March 2021 communicated on 24 May 2022 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the withdrawal of the applicant’s parental authority. In particular, on 30 October 2020 the Supreme Court of Justice finally upheld the appellate judgment, which had reversed the first-instance court judgment in the applicant’s favour and had withdrawn his parental authority because he had failed to get involved in his child’s life in the seven years since the divorce and registered a three-month delay in the payment of alimony on one occasion. Two judges expressed dissenting opinions, noting that the applicant had been prevented from contacting with the child, who had left the country together with his mother shortly after the divorce. The applicant complains of a violation of his rights under Article 8 of the Convention. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for his family life, contrary to Article   8 of the Convention ( Ilya Lyapin v. Russia , no.   70879/11, §§ 44-60, 30 June 2020)?