Published on 27 February 2023

FIRST SECTION

Application no. 30515/22 Ľ.L. against Slovakia lodged on 10 June 2022 communicated on 6 February 2023

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The application concerns the length and effectiveness of proceedings conducted before the Banská Bystrica District Court under file no. 37Em/3/2017 for the enforcement of a judicial ruling concerning the applicant’s contact rights with regard to his child, as amended by two urgent interim measures ( neodkladné opatrenie ) issued upon requests by the child’s mother in the proceedings for a modification of the applicants’ contact rights initiated by her.

On 20 January 2022, following the applicant’s constitutional complaint, the Constitutional Court found a violation of his right to a hearing within a reasonable time in the enforcement proceedings. However, it found the established delays not being substantial enough to amount to a violation of his parental rights (II. US 381/2021).

On 1 October 2021 the enforcement court ordered the enforcement, and the ruling was upheld on appeal on 4 April 2022. The enforcement is ongoing.

The applicant alleges having seen his child for the last time on 21 November 2018.

The case raises issues under Articles 6 and 8 of the Convention.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Having regard to all the circumstances, including the Constitutional Court’s findings, has the reasonable time requirement of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention been violated? In particular, have the domestic authorities been acting with special diligence as required by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in cases such as the present one (see Laino v. Italy [GC], no. 33158/96, §§ 18 and 22, ECHR 1999-I, and E.O. and V.P. v. Slovakia , nos. 56193/00 and 57581/00, § 84, 27 April 2004)?

2. Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for his family life, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention?

In particular, given the alleged complete absence of the applicant’s contact with his child since 21 November 2018 and the role inherently played by the passage of time, have the domestic authorities complied with their positive obligations to respect for the applicant’s family life (see Ribić v. Croatia , no. 27148/12, § 92, 2 April 2015, with further references)? In addition, having regard to all the circumstances, including the particularly strained relationship between the applicant and the child’s mother, have the domestic authorities discharged their positive obligations to ensure the effective exercise of the applicant’s contact rights and to establish a meaningful relationship between him and his child ( Malec v. Poland , no. 28623/12, §§ 74-78, 28 June 2016, Giorgioni v. Italy , no. 43299/12, § 75, 15 September 2016)?