02 Aug The best interest of the child is more important than determining the paternity

Fröhlich v. Germany (application no. 16112/15, 26.07.2018) The applicant, Arnulf Fröhlich, is a German national who was born in 1966 and lives in Köthel (Germany). The case concerned Mr. Fröhlich’s belief that he was the biological father of a baby girl born in 2006.

In 2004 Mr. Fröhlich started a relationship with a married woman, who continued to live with her husband and their six children. The relationship ended shortly after she gave birth to a baby girl in October 2006.

All Mr. Fröhlich’s attempts to have contact with the girl were subsequently refused. The married couple denied that he was the biological father and refused to give their consent to a paternity test. Mr. Fröhlich also initiated various proceedings before the courts to establish his legal paternity, to have a paternity test and to obtain contact and information rights, all without success. In particular, basing its decision on a written statement by the child’s guardian appointed to act on her behalf and the oral statements of Mr. Fröhlich, the child’s legal parents and the child herself, the Court of Appeal ultimately decided in 2013 to grant neither contact nor information rights. It held that both would require addressing the preliminary issue of whether Mr. Fröhlich was the child’s biological father which would not be in her best interests.

In coming to this decision, the Court of Appeal analysed the family’s situation, which it felt would be at risk if the legal parents were forced into clarifying the paternity issues. It also added that contact with the applicant would in any event not be in the child’s best interests.

In 2014 the Federal Constitutional Court declined to consider his constitutional complaint. Relying on Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention, Mr. Fröhlich complained about the domestic courts’ decisions refusing to grant him contact rights and to order the legal parents to provide him with information about the child.

The Court considers therefore that the Court of Appeal’s decision has been made in the child’s best interest and it is satisfied that the latter adduced relevant and sufficient reasons to justify its refusal not only to grant contact rights but also to order the child’s parents to provide the applicant with information about the child. Thus, there has been no violation of Article 8.

References from the official website of the European Court of Human Rights