In domestic private law and as well in the EU law concerning judicial cooperation in civil matters, a legislative approach placing the rights of the child at the center has become more prevalent than in the past. This is evident in the legislation of the Hungarian Civil Code and the Civil Procedure Code adopted in recent years, whether it concerns the rules concerning the expansion of the joint parental custody or the provisions strengthening the expression of the child's views. But a similar significant change in approach is also reflected in the legislation concerning family law, especially in the Brussels IIb Regulation. The study presents the EU and national rules that have conceptually modified the suspension and refusal of the enforcement of decisions regulating the exercise of parental custody and contact, prioritizing the best interests of the child over the successful enforcement.
A magánjog területét érintő hazai és uniós jogban a korábbiaknál sokkal erőteljesebben érvényesül a gyermek jogait középpontba helyező jogalkotási szemlélet. Ez látható a Ptk. és a Pp. utóbbi éveket érintő jogalkotásában, legyen szó a szülői felügyelet közös gyakorlásának szélesítését érintő szabályokról vagy a gyermek véleménynyilvánítását erősítő rendelkezésekről. De hasonló markáns szemléletváltozás tükröződik a családjog területét érintő jogalkotásban is, így különösen a Brüsszel IIb rendeletben. A tanulmány azokat az uniós jogi és nemzeti szabályokat mutatja be, amelyek koncepcionálisan módosították a szülői felügyelet és kapcsolattartás gyakorlását rendező határozatok végrehajtásának felfüggesztését és megtagadását a gyermek legfőbb érdekét a végrehajtás sikeressége elé helyezve.
In recent years, the child rights focused approach has become prominent in civil substantive and procedural law. This is well reflected in the amendment of the Civil Code which came into force on 1 January 2022, providing the opportunity for the courts dealing with parental custody proceedings to order joint parental custody at the request of either parent, in case the court is convinced that this serves the best interest of the minor child.
But the focus on the interests of the child is similarly demonstrated by the amendment to Section 4:171 (4) of the Civil Code by Act LVII of 2021, which entered into force on 1 August 2022, stipulating that in all civil actions concerning the settlement of the exercise of parental custody, the court must notify the child who has sufficient level of understanding of the possibility to make a statement.
This amendment strengthens the exercise of the child's right to express his/her views and ensures that children capable of forming their own views are given a real and effective opportunity to express them. The amendments cited above, which entered into force in 2022, are in line with the provisions of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted in New York on 20 November 1989 (hereinafter: CRC) and ensure that the rights contained therein are enforced[1] and contribute to the strengthening of a child-centered justice.[2]
The provisions of Regulation (EU) 2019/1111 on jurisdiction, the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, and on child abduction (hereinafter: Brussels IIb Regulation or Regulation), in particular Article 21 thereof, had an indisputable impact on the amendment to the Civil Code cited above. The latter amendment to the Civil Code had an undeniably significant impact on the case-law in matrimonial and parental responsibility cases, the recognition and enforcement of decisions, and the wrongful removal of children, in particular Article 21 thereof.[3]
The provision of the Civil Code cited above in connection with the Brussels IIb Regulation has received a great deal of resonance in the literature[4] and in public discourse, and as a result, the provisions concerning the expression of the child's views[5] have received greater attention in recent times, both in cross-border and national civil proceedings.
However, less attention has been paid to innovations concerning the enforcement of decisions in parental responsibility proceedings, in particular the suspension and refusal of enforcement of such decisions. Yet there is no better example of the application of Article 3 of the CRC[6] than these provisions, which also reflects the growing importance of the child-centered regulation in EU law.[7]
Within the framework of this study, we primarily analyze these specific provisions facilitating child-centered enforcement in Act LIII of 1994 on Judicial Enforcement (hereinafter: JEA), Act CXXX of 2016 on Civil Procedure (hereinafter: CPC) and Act CXVIII of 2017 on
- 7/8 -
the Rules Applicable to Non-Contentious Civil Proceedings and Certain Non-Contentious Court Proceedings (hereinafter: Non-contentious Act), exploring the international and EU legal background of the amendments.
It is well known that the number of international families in the EU is constantly growing, as estimated at 16 million in 2019[8], with the consequence of increased number of cross-border family law disputes. The importance of the uniform EU regulation of these disputes is further enhanced by the fact that a judgment or settlement in a family law case that originally had no international element, falls within the scope of EU law once the parent exercising parental custody moves abroad with the child and the judgement concerning custody rights previously delivered in Hungary has to be recognized or enforced.. Therefore, as we shall see, the provisions analyzed below go far beyond the cross-border family law disputes.
Among the most important innovations of the Brussels IIb Regulation applicable to parental responsibility cases,[9] it is important to note that it enhances children's rights much more strongly[10] than its predecessor.[11] This approach can be seen in the explicit and clear regulation of the child's right to express his or her views[12] as well as in the provisions reflecting the conceptual change introduced in the judgements concerning the suspension and refusal of enforcement, as well in the authentic instruments and agreements in matters of parental responsibility.
It should be noted that, after several decades, the exequatur procedure has been abolished in parental responsibility cases, with regard to all decisions on parental responsibility, while maintaining the special nature of certain privileged decisions. The Regulation also introduces a significant minimum level of harmonization in the area of enforcement. Article 56 of the Regulation, which will be analyzed in detail later, partially harmonizes the enforcement law of the Member States by introducing uniform provisions on the suspension of enforcement.
A Jogkódex-előfizetéséhez tartozó felhasználónévvel és jelszóval is be tud jelentkezni.
Az ORAC Kiadó előfizetéses folyóiratainak „valós idejű” (a nyomtatott lapszámok megjelenésével egyidejű) eléréséhez kérjen ajánlatot a Szakcikk Adatbázis Plusz-ra!
Visszaugrás
