EUPillar O.C. v. H.A. - 06/475/C - Civ. (réf.) Bruxelles, 30 April 2007

Summary

The parties split up in 2005. In a previous decision of 31 July 2006, the judge had allowed the mother to live in Germany and the father to live in Sweden. The Court gave permission for the mother to take the two children with her. The mother now applies for a definitive calendar for the division of the school holidays. The father also want to see his children for several longer periods outside of school holidays. The judge heard the children on 20 March 2007. They are 10 and 13 years old. The children said they prefer not to leave school early on Fridays to meet their father in Sweden. The goal of the hearing of the child is to inform the court so that it can take the best solution, not to transfer the power of decision to the children. The court says that it is also the parent’s responsibility to explain to their children that whatever is decided, they will have to go Sweden regularly to see their father and that this might impact their participation in certain festivities. The judge works out a planning for the whole school year and issues a certificate on the basis of Art. 41(1) to enforce it. Short critique Before issuing a certificate, the judge hears the children, as required by Article 41 Brussels IIa. In its two previous decisions in the same case, the judge did not hear the children for reasons of urgency, even though Article 41 does not provide for such an exception.