Published on 28 March 2022

FOURTH SECTION

Application no. 51056/21 Giuseppe OSSO against Bulgaria lodged on 14 October 2021 communicated on 9 March 2022

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The application concerns the outcome and the length of proceedings under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (“the Hague Convention”).

On 25 July 2019 the applicant, an Italian national, initiated proceedings, seeking the return of his son, aged four at the time, to his habitual place of residence (Switzerland), after the mother had retained the child in Bulgaria against the applicant’s consent. The Bulgarian Ministry of Justice, acting as the Central Authority within the meaning of the Hague Convention, received the applicant’s request on 5 August 2019 and instituted proceedings on his behalf before the Sofia City Court on 5 November 2019.

On 1 July 2020 the Sofia City Court granted the applicant’s request and ordered that the child be returned to Switzerland, finding that the exception under Article 13 (b) of the Hague Convention was not applicable, as there was no grave risk that the child would be exposed to physical or psychological harm or would be otherwise placed in an intolerable situation.

Upon the mother’s appeal, in a final judgment of 20 April 2021 the Sofia Court of Appeal turned down the applicant’s request. That court concluded that the child’s return would run against his interests and would endanger his physical and psychological development, in breach of Article 13 (b) of the Hague Convention. It noted the deteriorated relationship between the parents, the major role of the mother in the child’s upbringing and the allegedly ongoing criminal proceedings against her in Switzerland, which had been an obstacle hindering her return with the child there. Moreover, the court observed that the child was already well integrated in Bulgaria in a stable and calm family environment.

The applicant relies on Articles 6 and 8 of the Convention.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Did the refusal of the applicant’s request for his son’s return to Switzerland amount to a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for his family life, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention? In particular, did the Sofia Court of Appeal conduct an in-depth examination of the entire family situation and of all the relevant factors, and were the reasons given in its ruling “relevant and sufficient”? (see X v. Latvia [GC], no. 27853/09, §§ 93-108, ECHR 2013; and Vladimir Ushakov v. Russia , no. 15122/17, §§ 77-83, 18 June 2019)?

2. Did the domestic authorities comply with the requirement of speediness inherent in proceedings for the return of children (see, for example, G.S. v. Georgia , no. 2361/13, §§ 49 and 63-66, 21 July 2015)?