Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
The case originated in an application (no. 11057/02) against the Federal Republic of Germany lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by two German nationals, Mrs Cornelia Haase and Mr Josef Haase (“the applicants”), on 6 March 2002.
The applicants, who had been granted legal aid, were represented by Mr P. Koeppel, a lawyer practising in München. The German Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr K. Stoltenberg, Ministerialdirigent .
The applicants alleged, that the suspension of their parental responsibility for their four children and the three children of Mrs Haase's first marriage and the prohibition of access to all the children amounted to a breach of Article 8 of the Convention They also complained about the unfairness of the court proceedings under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.