Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
III 2017 171 • VG SZ III 2017 171 KI-generiert

Jurisdictional Review of Child Protection Authority Based on Habitual Residence

Geschäftsnummer III 2017 171
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Schweiz · Kanton Schwyz (CH-SZ)
Entscheiddatum
Ausgang Nichteintreten / Unzulässig (Inadmissible)
Originalquelle öffnen Entscheidsuche-Spiegel Maschinenlesbares Markdown (.md)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

A child and adult protective authority initiated a review of the jurisdiction of another such authority concerning a specific case, challenging the territorial competence previously established. The court reasoned that jurisdiction is determined by the habitual residence of the person concerned at the time the protective measure is requested or initiated, and since the subject had established a new, long-term residence in the jurisdiction of the challenged authority, that authority was indeed the competent body, thereby dismissing the appeal regarding the jurisdictional determination.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

Jurisdictional Review of Child Protection Authority Based on Habitual Residence: The court reasoned that jurisdiction is determined by the habitual residence of the person concerned at the time the protective measure is requested or initiated, and since the subject had established a new, long-term residence in the jurisdiction of the challenged authority, that authority was indeed the competent body, thereby dismissing the appeal regarding the jurisdictional determination.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
gewöhnlicher Aufenthalt des Kindes Überprüfung der Beistandschaft Bestimmung der örtlichen Zuständigkeit Kindeswohlgefährdung Für Rechtsbehelfe zuständige Stellen begleitetes Besuchsrecht
KI-generiert
III 2018 27
Parent v. Child and Adult Protection Authority on Jurisdiction
III 2020 149
Welfare Authority v. Child and Adult Protection Authority: Jurisdictional Dispute in Child Protection
III 2017 210
Child Protection Placement Appeal Remanded for Clarification
III 2020 170
Appeal of Child and Adult Protection Authority Decision Upheld
III 2020 80
Appeal of Child and Adult Protection Authority Placement Decision

Fragen Sie sich, wie dieser Entscheid auf Ihren Fall anwendbar ist?

Prüfen Sie diesen Entscheid zusammen mit Bundesrecht, kantonalen Erlassen, Kommentaren und Folgeentscheiden in Legislator AI.

Fall in Legislator öffnen →

Volltext

\n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n III 2017 171 |\n |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n |\n Entscheid vom 26. Januar 2018 |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Besetzung |\n lic.iur. Gion Tomaschett, Vizepräsident |\n \n|\n |\n Ruth Mikšovic-Waldis, Richterin Monica Huber-Landolt, Richterin |\n \n|\n |\n MLaw Joëlle Sigrist, Gerichtsschreiberin |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Parteien |\n Kindesund Erwachsenenschutzbehörde (KESB) A.________ (SZ), \n Beschwerdeführerin, |\n \n|\n |\n und |\n \n|\n |\n KESB B.________ (SG), \n Beigeladene, |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | \n Gegenstand · \n ZGB (Prüfung der Zuständigkeit nach