Often, the desire of one of the parents to travel abroad with a child does not correspond to the interests of the minor himself. If each of the parents has their own opinion on this issue and they failed to come to a common decision, then the only way to organize a trip with a child is to obtain permission to leave the child through the court. However, when considering a civil case, the court first of all assesses the circumstances of the upcoming departure, whether they violate the rights and interests of the minor.
In such disputes, the guardianship and guardianship authorities play an important role. In particular, they are direct participants in the proceedings, give an official opinion on the case, which, inter alia, may contain the consent of the guardianship and guardianship authorities for the child to travel abroad.
Ban on traveling abroad for a child
In our practice, it is not uncommon for former spouses to develop different approaches to raising their common children. Often there are conflicts between parents regarding the child’s place of residence, participation in the upbringing of the child after a divorce, the participation of each of the parents in the maintenance of the child. If one parent believes that the departure of the child accompanied by the second parent will not be in the interests of the minor, then he has the right to impose a ban on the child’s departure abroad. However, a ban can only be imposed on the basis of a court order.
In our practice, there was a case when one of the parents, believing that the father could take the child to a permanent place of residence abroad, declared a demand to impose a ban on the child’s departure from Belarus. This requirement was the subject of a judicial assessment.
Claimant’s legal position
According to the initiator of the trial, the defendant intended to leave for permanent residence with the child abroad. In particular, this is indicated by the fact that the child’s father is a foreign citizen, his temporary residence permit is expiring, due to the nature of his professional activity he has a lot of contacts with citizens living outside Belarus, in addition, the child’s grandparents are paternal line living abroad. Taking into account these circumstances, the plaintiff considered it possible to restrict the child’s right to travel abroad without the mother’s consent.
Defendant’s legal position
The defendant did not admit the claim, believing that there were no legal and factual grounds for satisfying the mother’s claims.
In particular, despite the fact that he is a foreign citizen, his father lives in Belarus, during the trial he received a TRP for a new term. Despite the fact that the Defendant works with foreign clients, his permanent place of work is a company registered in the territory of the Republic of Belarus. In addition, he understands that the child is socialized in Belarus, attends an educational institution in the city of Minsk, where his friends also study, and therefore the defendant never expressed a desire to change to move to another country with the child. Taking into account that the right to freedom of movement is a fundamental right of every citizen of the Republic of Belarus, enshrined in the Constitution, the defendant asked the court to refuse to satisfy the claim.
Conclusions of the court
Having analyzed the circumstances of the case, having examined the evidence presented by the parties, having heard the opinion of the guardianship and guardianship authority, I came to the conclusion that the plaintiff’s claims were denied.
Thus, the plaintiff’s arguments about the father’s intention to take the child abroad are the private opinion of the plaintiff and are not supported by the evidence presented in the case. In addition, the father’s relatives, with whom the child has a close relationship, live abroad, and the satisfaction of the plaintiff’s claims will become an obstacle to maintaining close contacts with them.
The above circumstances indicate that the mother’s demands to change the procedure for the minor’s departure abroad are not aimed at protecting the interests of the child.
According to the procedural law, in particular, the Code of Civil Procedure, the losing party reimburses the court costs. In the case described, the costs of the lawyer were reimbursed by the plaintiff to the defendant in full.
Features of disputes arising from family relations
Family relationships are continuing. This means that if the circumstances on which the court based its decision have significantly changed, then the plaintiff may again file a statement of claim on the same subject and grounds. To put it simply, in the described case, after some time, the mother can again initiate a similar lawsuit. In this case, among other things, it is necessary to provide the court with evidence that the circumstances associated with the case have changed significantly since the previous proceedings.
Our lawyers have extensive experience in representing the interests of our clients on issues related to the departure of children from the country. Our lawyers are ready to provide you with the following legal assistance in matters of children leaving the country:
– oral and written advice on the departure of a child from outside the Republic of Belarus;
– representation and protection of interests in courts on issues of a child’s departure from outside the Republic of Belarus.
If you have questions related to the departure of a child from Belarus, and you need help or advice from a lawyer, please contact our lawyers by e-mail: info@familylawyer.by or by phone: +375293570355.
