On permission to leave the Republic of Kazakhstan with a minor son for permanent residence and change of citizenship without obtaining consent
Disputes related to leaving the Republic of Kazakhstan for permanent residence In accordance with article 3 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child of November 20, 1989, ratified by the Republic of Kazakhstan on June 8, 1994, in all actions against children, regardless of whether they are undertaken by public or private institutions dealing with social security issues, courts by administrative or legislative authorities, priority is given to the best interests of the child Z. filed a lawsuit against G. on permission to leave the Republic of Kazakhstan with a minor son for permanent residence and change of citizenship without obtaining consent. The plaintiff motivated his claims by the fact that he had previously been in a close relationship with the defendant, and from this relationship they had a child, R., born on September 27, 2011. The court's decision of June 2, 2015 determined the place of residence of the child with his father Z. at his place of residence. Currently, G. is serving his sentence in prison following a court verdict of October 26, 2015. The plaintiff draws up documents to leave the Republic of Kazakhstan with his family for permanent residence in the Russian Federation, but the defendant refuses to grant permission to leave and change citizenship to the child, which, according to the plaintiff, is a violation of articles 13 and paragraph 2 of Article 21 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
On permission to leave the Republic of Kazakhstan with a minor son for permanent residence and change of citizenship without obtaining consent
Taking into account the clarification of the claims, the plaintiff asked the court to recognize the refusal to issue a notarized statement of absence of objection to travel outside the Republic of Kazakhstan as unlawful and exempt from obtaining an exit permit. By the decision of the Rudnensky City Court of Kostanay region dated July 5, 2017, the claim of Z. satisfied. It was decided to recognize G.'s refusal to issue a notarized statement of absence of objection to travel outside the Republic of Kazakhstan Z. illegal. Release Z. from obtaining permission from to travel with a minor child, R., born on September 27, 2011, to a permanent place of residence outside the Republic of Kazakhstan. By the decision of the judicial board for Civil Cases of the Kostanay Regional Court dated September 11, 2017, the court's decision was left unchanged, an editorial amendment was made, and the court's conclusion on the release of the plaintiff from obtaining permission from the defendant to leave for permanent residence outside the Republic of Kazakhstan was excluded from the operative part of the decision. The Judicial Board for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court upheld the judicial acts of the local courts. G.'s petition was dismissed on the following grounds. It follows from the case file that the minor R., by a court decision of June 2, 2015, lives with his father Z. The reason why the court determined the place of residence of the child with the father was G.'s recognition of Z.'s claim. In addition, the court took into account that G. was not working anywhere at the time of the case, had repeatedly appeared in a kindergarten in a drunken state, had been taken to a drunk tank, and had suicidal tendencies. By a court order dated August 5, 2016 from G. in favor of Z. alimony was collected for the maintenance of the child R.
By a court verdict dated October 29, 2015, she was convicted under part 3 of Article 28, part 3 of Article 24, paragraph 8 of part 2 of Article 99 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan for organizing an attempted murder for hire and sentenced to 11 years and 3 months in prison. In support of his claim, Z. He indicated that he intended to leave for permanent residence in the Russian Federation, but G. did not give his consent to the removal of the child. In accordance with subparagraph 6) of paragraph 7 of the Rules for Registration of documents for departure from the Republic of Kazakhstan for permanent residence, approved by Resolution of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated March 28, 2012 No. 361, when citizens of the Republic of Kazakhstan who have not reached the age of eighteen leave for permanent residence together with one of the parents (guardian, trustee) the notarized consent of the other parent residing in the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan is provided to the internal affairs bodies. In the absence of consent, the departure of a minor may be allowed in court. In accordance with article 3 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child of November 20, 1989, ratified by the Republic of Kazakhstan on June 8, 1994, in all actions concerning children, regardless of whether they are undertaken by public or private institutions dealing with social security issues, courts, administrative or legislative bodies, priority is given to the best interests of the child.. When resolving this dispute, the local courts took into account the interests of the minor child, the fact that he lived with his father, and the behavior of defendant G., and therefore the courts came to the correct conclusion about the validity of the plaintiff's claims. Investigating the issue of compliance by local courts with the rules of procedural law, the judicial board found that G. was familiar with Z.'s claims, and in an oral conversation with an employee of the RSU "Institutions of the EU-164/6" expressed her disagreement with the stated requirements, which the court of first instance was promptly notified of. The court's decision was handed over to G., she exercised her right to appeal the judicial act. Thus, G. had the opportunity to present her arguments about disagreement with the demands made against her and the decision when filing an appeal. In addition, G. had the right, in accordance with part 2 of Article 404 of the CPC, to present new evidence, but she did not exercise this right. With such data, the contested judicial acts do not raise doubts about their legality, taking into account the arguments of the defendant's petition, and there are no grounds provided by law for their cancellation in this case.
Attention!
Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.
For more information, please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085.
Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office Court Cases
