Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 9

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  child abduction
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Miejsce stałego pobytu dziecka. Cywilnoprawne aspekty uprowadzenia dziecka za granicę

100%
Wierciński J.
Forum Prawnicze
|
2020
|
issue 5 (61)
3-19
EN
The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction provides no fixed definition of its central term of habitual residence of a child. Recently, in Monasky v. Taglieri the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed the determination of an abducted child’s habitual residence, resolved a split among circuit courts regarding the focus of habitual residence inquiry as to whether habitual residence should be determined using objective evidence of the child’s perspective, subjective evidence of parental intent and established the new “totalityof-the-circumstances” standard of review. As this is quite a different position as compared to the position of the Polish Supreme Court who decided that the intentions of caregiving parents are not relevant considerations in determining a child’s habitual residence, this article analyses recent US developments arguing that the Polish Supreme Court position should be changed.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

POLICE DUTIES IN PROCEEDINGS CONCERNING FAMILY MATTERS OF MINORS UNDER SELECTED EU AND INTERNATIONAL LAW (WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO CASES OF CHILD ABDUCTION)

100%
Franusz A.
Przegląd Policyjny
|
2020
|
vol. 138(2)
109-120
EN
The interests of children are of paramount importance, therefore it is sometimes necessary for the authorities to interfere in matters relating to their custody, when a child is likely to have been wrongfully removed or retained in breach of the rights of custody attributed to a person, an institution or any other body (child abduction). Therefore a number of international and European Union legal acts impose on national legislators the obligation to introduce mechanisms involving central authorities into cooperation with each other and promoting cooperation amongst the competent authorities in their respective states to make proper discoveries to secure the prompt return of children. For this purpose, the Law of 26 January 2018 on the exercise of certain acts of the central authority in family matters relating to legal transactions under European Union law and international agreements was adopted. Pursuant to its provisions, Police offi cers shall, by virtue of their specifi c powers, assist the central authority and the courts on matters relating to the abduction of minors abroad. Their role is mainly linked to providing the authorities with relevant information, assisting the probation offi cer, and searching the place where the minor is presumed to be living.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

GÄFGEN V. GERMANY. CASE STUDY

75%
PATORA K., ŚWIĄDER E.
Przegląd Policyjny
|
2020
|
vol. 138(2)
219-235
EN
The article focuses on the case of Gäfgen v. Germany, which con-cerns the restrictions imposed on police offi cers who work on cases involving terror and violence posing a risk to human life, and on the ones who have to make decisions protecting victims’ lives. The choice of measures serving the protection of the highest value, i.e. human life, is not easy. At the same time, police offi cers are assessed in terms of criminal law as regards the protection of the basic human rights enjoyed by perpetrators who pose a risk to other people’s lives. The case of Gäfgen v. Germany regards the choice of values, and the criminal liability of police offi cers, connected with thereof, as well as the problem of the admissibility of evidence obtained in breach of the law in criminal proceedings, and the limitations of the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine.
4
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Child abductions and parental kidnappings. Selected contexts of family crises and attempts of their solutions

75%
Dąbrowska A., Wojtkowiak M.
Problemy Opiekuńczo-Wychowawcze
|
2018
|
vol. 570(5)
14-25
EN
The subject of the article refers to parental kidnappings and abductions as a phenomenon which constitutes a family efficiency crisis. The chosen subject implies the necessity to analyse the described problem from two perspectives: violation of a legal norm and disturbance in functioning of a family seen as an educational environment. The second aspect is followed by a need to indicate the possibilities of overcoming the crisis, ways of help, persons and organizations capable of providing such help, as well as the chances of eliminating the effects of the difficult situation for the future. As a special form of reparative actions taken in the described situation, the family mediation was indicated, which may constitute a way to a profound analysis and understanding of the conflict by the parties – the fact that may influence the efficacy of preventing repetitiveness of the phenomenon.
5

Unification of Judicial Practice Concerning Parental Responsibility in the European Union – Challenges Applying Regulation Brussels II Bis

75%
Pranevičienė K.
Baltic Journal of Law & Politics
|
2014
|
vol. 7
|
issue 1
113-127
EN
The article briefly describes international legislation in parental responsibility matters and focuses on the Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 (in practice called Brussels II a or Brussels II bis). The essay reveals and analyses the difficulties which occur while hearing parental responsibility cases within the European Union. Particular attention is given to special cases which were difficult to resolve for the national courts of the Republic of Lithuania. Also, the practice of the Court of Justice of the European Union is examined. The guidelines on how to avoid the problems of establishing jurisdiction are given. The relations of 1980 Hague Convention on international child abduction and Regulations Brussels II bis are revealed and the reasons for adoption of the Regulation are highlighted. The article also proposes improvements for Article 15 of the Regulation and the effective application of a modified forum non conveniens doctrine in parental responsibility cases.
6

Nowa unijna regulacja spraw małżeńskich i rodzinnych – rozporządzenie Rady (UE) 2019/1111

75%
Bobrzyńska O.
Kwartalnik Prawa Prywatnego
|
2020
|
vol. 29
|
issue 3
511-544
EN
The article discusses main changes introduced by Council Regulation (EU) 2019/1111 of 25 June 2019 on jurisdiction, the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, and on international child abduction in view of criticism and expectations expressed with regard to its predecessor, i.e. Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347.
7
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Dobro dziecka a odmowa jego wydania na podstawie art. 13 ust. 1 lit. b Konwencji haskiej dotyczącej cywilnych aspektów uprowadzenia dziecka za granicę

63%
Wojtaszek-Mik E.
Prawo w Działaniu
|
2022
|
issue 50
44-72
EN
The analysis of the views of the doctrine and of the European Court of Human Rights, the Constitutional Tribunal and the Supreme Court on the concept of “the child’s welfare” allows to assume that it is the same as the “interests of the child” referred to in the preamble to The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. This criterion must be taken into account by the courts when assessing the grounds for refusing to order the return the abducted child under Art. 13 (b) of The Hague Convention. However it should be considered that this provision constitutes an exception to the principle of ensuring the return of the child to the state from which it was taken.
PL
Zawarta w artykule analiza poglądów doktryny oraz Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka, Trybunału Konstytucyjnego i Sądu Najwyższego na temat pojęcia „dobra dziecka” pozwala przyjąć, że jest ono tożsame z „interesem dziecka”, o którym mowa w preambule Konwencji haskiej dotyczącej cywilnych aspektów uprowadzenia dziecka za granicę. Kryterium to powinno być brane pod uwagę przez sądy w trakcie oceny przesłanek odmowy wydania dziecka uprowadzonego na podstawie art. 13 ust. 1 lit. b Konwencji haskiej. Należy jednak uwzględnić, że przepis ten stanowi wyjątek od zasady zapewnienia powrotu dziecka do państwa, z którego zostało zabrane.
8
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Glosa do wyroku Trybunału Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej w sprawie C-644/20 z 12.05.2022 r. – zmiana miejsca zwykłego pobytu małoletniego wierzyciela świadczeń alimentacyjnych w sytuacji wydania wyroku nakazującego jego powrót w trybie Konwencji haskiej z 1980 r. dotyczącej cywilnych aspektów uprowadzenia dziecka za granicę

63%
Tomczewska A.
Prawo w Działaniu
|
2022
|
issue 54
238-244
EN
The gloss endorses the position of the Court of Justice of the European Union presented in the judgment issued in case C-644/20, in which the CJEU recognized – for the purposes of determining the law applicable in a cross-border maintenance case – the habitual residence of the child (pursuant to Article 3 of the Protocol Hague of 23 November 2007 on the Law Applicable to Maintenance Obligations) the country to which the child has been abducted despite a judgment ordering the return of the child under the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The Court, bearing in mind the best interests of the child, recognized the need to take into account the current environment in which the child currently resides in the context of assessing the real needs of the maintenance creditor. Thus, the CJEU did not adopt the concept contained in Regulation 2201/2003, according to which the jurisdictional connecting factor based on the child’s habitual residence, in principle, cannot be linked to the country to which the child was wrongfully removed or retained.
PL
Glosa wyraża aprobatę do stanowiska Trybunału Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej przedstawionego w wyroku wydanym w sprawie C-644/20, w którym TSUE uznał – na potrzeby ustalenia prawa właściwego w sprawie alimentacyjnej o charakterze transgranicznym – za miejsce zwykłego pobytu dziecka (na podstawie art. 3 Protokołu haskiego z 23.11.2007 r. o prawie właściwym dla zobowiązań alimentacyjnych) państwo, do którego dziecko zostało uprowadzone, pomimo wydania wyroku nakazującego powrót dziecka na podstawie Konwencji haskiej z 25.10.1980 r. dotyczącej cywilnych aspektów uprowadzenia dziecka za granicę. Trybunał, mając na uwadze dobro dziecka, uznał konieczność uwzględnienia aktualnego środowiska, w którym dziecko aktualnie przebywa w kontekście oceny realnych potrzeb wierzyciela alimentacyjnego. Tym samym TSUE nie przejął koncepcji zawartej w rozporządzeniu 2201/2003, zgodnie z którą łącznik jurysdykcyjny oparty na miejscu zwykłego pobytu dziecka co do zasady nie może być powiązany z państwem, do którego dziecko zostało bezprawnie uprowadzone lub w którym zostało zatrzymane.
9
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Nowelizacja krajowych przepisów dotyczących wykonywania konwencji haskiej

51%
Kluza J.
Ius Novum
|
2020
|
vol. 14
|
issue 3
176-189
EN
The article discusses issues related to the recently amended provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure with regard to proceedings in the case of an application to return a child filed under the Hague Convention. The amended Act changes the jurisdiction of a court in these matters, transferring it from the level of a lowest regional court to selected district courts, and in appeal proceedings, the only competent court is the Court of Appeal in Warsaw. The Act also introduces the possibility of lodging a cassation appeal against the decision of the second-instance court. As the Ministry of Justice, the author of the Bill, directly claims, the aim of the regulation is to ‘protect Polish children’. As a result, the Act raises extralegal emotions. With this in mind, and primarily considering the purpose of the Convention, which is the best interests of the child, the assessment of the amendments should be made with great caution.
PL
Artykuł dotyczy problematyki związanej z dokonaną w ostatnim czasie nowelizacją przepisów kodeksu postępowania cywilnego w zakresie postępowania w sprawie wniosku o wydanie dziecka złożonego na podstawie konwencji haskiej. Ustawa ta dokonuje zmiany właściwości rzeczowej sądu w tych sprawach, przenosząc je z poziomu sądu rejonowego do wybranych sądów okręgowych, a w postępowaniu odwoławczym jako jedyny właściwy określa Sąd Apelacyjny w Warszawie. Ustawa wprowadza także możliwość złożenia skargi kasacyjnej od postanowienia sądu drugiej instancji. Jak wprost przyznaje Ministerstwo Sprawiedliwości, będące autorem projektu ustawy, jej celem jest „ochrona polskich dzieci”. Powoduje to, że ustawie towarzyszą pozaprawne emocje. Mając to na względzie, a przede wszystkim patrząc na cel konwencji, jakim jest dobro dziecka, ocena dokonanych zmian powinna być dokonywana z dużą ostrożnością.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.