CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 17 décembre 2019

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s65B66A85 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .s97EB40D9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } Information Note on the Court’s case-law 240 May 2020 Abdi Ibrahim v. Norway (referral) - 15379/16 Judgment 17.12.2019 [Section II] Article 8 Article 8-1 Respect for family life Severance of mother-child ties, in a context of different cultural and religious backgrounds of mother and adoptive parents: case referred to the Grand Chamber The applicant, a Somali national, was granted refugee status in Norway in 2010; she was accompanied by her son, who had been born a few months previously in Kenya. In December 2010 the baby was placed in emergency care by the social services. He was subsequently placed with a Christian family, while the applicant had argued he should go either to her cousins or to a Somali or Muslim family. The social-welfare authorities applied to allow the foster family to adopt the child, which would lead to the applicant having no contact, and for the applicant’s parental rights to be removed. The applicant lodged an appeal: she did not ask for the child’s return as he had spent a long time with foster parents to whom he had become attached, but she sought contact so that he could maintain his cultural and religious roots. In 2015 the court of appeal dismissed this appeal and authorised the child’s adoption, after having examined, among other questions, the ethnic, cultural and religious aspects of the proposed adoption. By a judgment of 17 December 2019 , a Chamber of the Court: –   held that the applicant’s complaints should be examined solely in terms of her right to family life (she had also relied on Article 9, in view of the religious aspects), –   concluded, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention; –   noted that the applicant had not claimed compensation for damage. The Chamber referred to the principles summarised in the Strand Lobben and Others v. Norway judgment ([GC], 37283/13, 10 September 2019, Information Note 232 ). It stated that it had based its conclusion of a violation on the case as a whole, and on the reasons which had spoken for maintaining contact, in particular with regard to the cultural and religious background. On 11 May 2020 the case was referred to the Grand Chamber at the applicant’s request.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes