003-8487524-12034530
WyrokETPCz2026-03-19
Analiza orzeczenia
Sekcja wygenerowana przez AI na podstawie treści orzeczenia — nie stanowi cytatu.
Zagadnienie prawne
Czy decyzja sądów francuskich nakazująca powrót córki skarżącej do Tunezji, na podstawie Konwencji Haskiej, naruszyła jej prawo do poszanowania życia prywatnego i rodzinnego (art. 8 Konwencji) oraz prawo do rzetelnego procesu (art. 6 Konwencji)?Stan faktyczny
Skarżąca, M.A., obywatelka Francji i Tunezji, poślubiła H.A. w Tunezji w 2009 roku. Mieli córkę I., urodzoną we Francji. Po separacji w 2015 roku, H.A. osiedlił się w Tunezji, a M.A. z córką mieszkały we Francji. W 2024 roku skarżąca opuściła Tunezję z córką i ustaliła jej miejsce zamieszkania we Francji. H.A. wszczął postępowanie w celu uzyskania nakazu powrotu I. do Tunezji na podstawie Konwencji Haskiej. Sądy francuskie (sąd rodzinny w Nanterre, Sąd Apelacyjny w Wersalu, Sąd Kasacyjny) orzekły o powrocie dziecka.Rozstrzygnięcie
Trybunał stwierdził naruszenie art. 8 Konwencji. Orzekł, że stwierdzenie naruszenia stanowi wystarczające zadośćuczynienie za szkodę niemajątkową. Środek tymczasowy (zasada 39 Regulaminu Trybunału) pozostaje w mocy.Pełny tekst orzeczenia
issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 069 (2026) 19.03.2026
Judgments and decisions of 19 March 2026
The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing two judgments1 and six decisions2: one Chamber judgment is summarised below; a separate press release has been issued for a Chamber judgment in the case of B.G. v. France (application no. 70945/17); the six decisions, can be consulted on Hudoc and do not appear in this press release. The judgment summarised below is available only in French
M.A. v. France (no. 34324/24)
The applicant, Ms M.A., is a French and Tunisian national who was born in 1979 and lives in MaisonsLaffitte (France). On 25 September 2009 the applicant married H.A., a Belgian and Tunisian national, in Tunisia. They had a child together, I., who was born in France and is a French and Tunisian national. H.A. decided to settle in Tunisia for professional reasons, while the applicant continued to live with I. in France. In 2015 the couple separated. On 26 February 2024 the applicant left Tunisia with I. and established her daughter's residence at her home in France. On 22 April 2024, having located his daughter and the applicant in France, H.A. brought expedited proceedings on the merits against the latter before the Nanterre family-affairs judge in order to obtain an order for I.'s return to Tunisia, under the Hague Convention. On 3 October 2024 the Versailles Court of Appeal upheld the judgment of 17 June 2024 ordering I.'s return to Tunisia. The Court of Cassation declared the subsequent appeal inadmissible. The case concerns the French courts' decision to order the return of the applicant's daughter to Tunisia under the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Relying on Articles 6 (right to a fair hearing) and 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights, the applicant submits that the French courts' decision to order her daughter's return to Tunisia, where the child's father lives, violated her right to respect for her private and family life and her right to a fair hearing. Violation of Article 8 Interim measure (Rule 39 of the Rules of Court): still in force until the present judgment becomes final or until further notice; Just satisfaction: The Court decided that the finding of a violation constituted in itself sufficient just satisfaction for the non-pecuniary damage sustained by the applicant.
1 Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a Chamber judgment's delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a panel of five judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and deliver a final judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the Convention, judgments delivered by a Committee are final. Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution. Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution
2 Inadmissibility and strike-out decisions are final.
This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. Decisions, judgments and further information about the Court can be found on www.echr.coe.int. Follow the Court on Bluesky @echr.coe.int, X ECHR_CEDH, LinkedIn, and YouTube. Contact ECHRPress to subscribe to the press-release mailing list. Where can the Court's press releases be found? HUDOC - Press collection Press contacts [email protected] | tel: +33 3 90 21 42 08 We are happy to receive journalists' enquiries via either email or telephone. Tracey Turner-Tretz (tel: + 33 3 88 41 35 30) Denis Lambert (tel: + 33 3 90 21 41 09) Inci Ertekin (tel: + 33 3 90 21 55 30) Jane Swift (tel: + 33 3 88 41 29 04) Claire Windsor (tel: + 33 3 88 41 24 01) The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.
2
© Rada Europy / Europejski Trybunał Praw Człowieka, źródło: HUDOC (hudoc.echr.coe.int), pozyskano 13.07.2026. · Źródło