header-logo header-logo

14 January 2010 / Professor Susan Nash
Issue: 7400 / Categories: Features , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Human rights & wrongs

Professor Susan Nash provides an update on recent human rights cases

The applicant in Zaunegger v Germany (App no 22028/04) complained that the German Civil Code discriminated against unmarried fathers in comparison with divorced fathers. Following the birth of his daughter, the applicant had co-habited with the child’s mother for several years. Before separating, they reached an agreement with the help of the Youth Welfare Office which provided for regular contact with the child.

However, under the German Civil Code, joint custody could only be obtained through a joint declaration, marriage, or a court order which required the consent of each parent. As the mother was not willing to agree on a joint custody declaration, the applicant applied unsuccessfully to the domestic court for a joint custody order.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) found that by dismissing the applicant’s request for joint custody without examining whether it would be in the child’s interest, the national court had treated him differently from the mother, and from married fathers. In assessing whether

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll