all be permitted with the consent of the Custody and Guardianship Agency, or with the consent of the child's guardian (trustee), of his foster parents or of the authorities of the institution where he resides."
Article 76: Lifting the Restriction on the Parental Rights
"1. If the grounds on which one or both parents' parental rights were restricted cease to exist, the court may, upon an application by the parents (or one of them) make a decision returning the child to the parents (or one of them) and lifting the restrictions stipulated by Article 74 of the present Code.
2. The court shall have the right, taking into account the child's interests, to refuse to grant the application if the child's return to the parents (or one of them) is contrary to his interests."
Article 77: Removal of the Child in Cases of a Direct Threat to his Life or Health
"1. If a direct threat exists to the child's life or health, the guardianship and trusteeship body shall have the right to remove the child from his parents (or from one of them) or from another person in whose charge he is.
The immediate removal of the child shall be carried out by the Custody and Guardianship Agency pursuant to the corresponding order of the local self-governing body.
2. When removing the child, the Custody and Guardianship Agency must inform the Prosecutor without delay, provide for the child's temporary accommodation and, within seven days of the decision of the local self-governing body to remove the child, lodge an application with the court for withdrawal or restriction of the parental rights."
THE LAW
I. Alleged violation of Article 8 of the Convention
88. Relying on Article 8 of the Convention, the applicant complained that the authorities had denied him access to the child following her removal, during her stay in hospital and while she was in foster care. This Convention provision, in so far as relevant, provides:
"1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life...
2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others."
A. The parties' observations
89. In their observations on the admissibility of the case, the Government submitted that the restrictions in question had been aimed at protecting the child's health, that A. had not expressed a wish to see her parents and that in February and March 2005 access had been restricted on account of the influenza quarantine. In their further observations on the merits of the case, the Government emphasised that the restrictions on the applicant and his wife's parental rights had been based on the law and had been motivated, above all, by the child's interests. As to the period between 27 January and 18 March 2005, the meetings between the applicant, his wife and A. had been carried out "through the window" because of the influenza quarantine. Between 25 March and 2 November 2005, the adoptive parents had been allowed to see A. once a week for about an hour each time.
90. The applicant maintained his initial complaints. He submitted that for two years he had been denied access to A. for no good reason.
B. The Court's assessment
1. Whether there was an interference with
the applicant's family life
91. The Court would firstly reiterate that the mutual enjoyment by parent and child of each other's company constitute
> 1 2 3 ... 23 24 25 26 ... 27