We are searching data for your request:
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.
BGH: Regulation is constitutional
A child's social-family ties take precedence over biological fatherhood. There is no constitutional objection to the fact that, according to the law, legal paternity cannot be challenged, as the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) in Karlsruhe decided in a decision published on Thursday, November 16, 2017 (file number: XII ZB 525/16).
He thus rejected the biological father of a child born in October 2013. It lives in Brandenburg with the mother, another man and another child together. The mother's partner has recognized paternity.
The biological father was able to prove his paternity with a parentage test and now wanted legal paternity for himself. The district court and the Brandenburg higher regional court already dismissed the lawsuit. According to the law, challenge to paternity requires that there is "no social-family relationship" between the child and his legal father.
The BGH now also agreed to this. The corresponding legal regulation is also not unconstitutional, according to the Karlsruhe decision of October 18, 2017.
The BGH explained that the legal regulation introduced in 2004 was based on a decision of the Federal Constitutional Court on April 9, 2003 (file number: 1 BvR 1493/96). In it, the Federal Constitutional Court wanted to give the biological father the opportunity to contest if he himself had a bond with the child, but the legal father did not.
This corresponds to the legal regulation that protects the child's existing social and family ties. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg also approved the German regulation (judgment and JurAgentur notification of March 22, 2012, ref .: 45071/09 and 23338/09; similar to Hungary: judgment and JurAgentur notification of 12 February 2013, ref .: 48494/06).
In 2013, the Federal Constitutional Court also dismissed the former lover after a married woman flung herself; The integration of the child into the family of the mother and her husband took precedence (decision of December 4, 2013, file number: 1 BvR 1154/10; JurAgentur report of December 23, 2013). mwo / fle