Protection of the minor

The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled in favor of a father who was requesting a change in the custody of his minor children, arguing that they were living in an environment of violence caused by the new partner of the mother. The case began when the father claimed that the children should live with him after several incidents involving the mother's current partner, who had been convicted of gender-based violence and of disobeying the restraining order against the mother herself. In the

first instance , the court ruled in favor of the father, but the mother appealed and a Provincial Court returned custody to her, arguing that the violence situation no longer existed because there was a restraining order , and that the reports recommended not to change custody. However, after the appeal to the SC, this there was a restraining order , and the reports recommended not to change custody. However, after the appeal to the Supreme Court, this has rectified and confirmed custody for the father, considering that, even though the mother is a victim of gender-based violence, the main priority is to protect the children from any violent environment, even when it comes from one of the parents' partners.

The Supreme Court highlights that the appealed sentence did not sufficiently assess the risk evidence for the minors nor the fact that the mother's partner continued living in the house despite the court order. Additionally, it includes family testimonies showing the children's fear and discomfort due to episodes of violence in their environment. It points out that the children's best interest must prevail, even if it means separating siblings or limiting contact with the mother, if necessary to protect their emotional well-being and their development.

Ultimately, the sentence emphasizes that, in cases of family violence, judges must take special care in justifying their decisions and prioritize safety and the best interest of the minors, even above other rights or situations such as being a victim of one of the parents. In addition, decides to report the case to the Public Prosecutor's Office to consider whether additional measures are necessary additional measures regarding other children of the mother with different partners.

The Supreme Court (TS) has ruled in favor of a father who requested a change in custody of his minor children, arguing that they were living in a violent environment caused by the mother's new partner. The case began when the father claimed that the children should live with him after several incidents involving the mother's current partner, who was convicted of gender-based violence and for disobeying a restraining order against the mother.
Initially, the court ruled in favor of the father, but the mother appealed and a Provincial Court returned custody to her, arguing that the violent situation no longer existed because there was a restraining order, and that reports recommended not changing custody. However, after the appeal to the TS, it reversed the decision and confirmed custody for the father, considering that, even though the mother is a victim of gender-based violence, the key aspect is to protect the children from any violent environment, even when it comes from one of the parents' partners.
The TS emphasizes that the appealed sentence did not adequately assess the risk evidence for the minors or the fact that the mother's partner continued to live in the house despite the court order. It also includes family testimonies showing the children's fear and discomfort due to episodes of violence in their environment. It points out that the best interest of the minors must prevail, even if it means separating siblings or limiting contact with the mother, if necessary to protect their emotional well-being and development.
Ultimately, the sentence insists that in cases of family violence, judges must be particularly careful in justifying their decisions and prioritize the safety and best interest of the minors, even above other rights or situations such as being a victim of one of the parents. In addition, decides to report the case to the Public Prosecutor's Office to consider whether additional measures are necessary regarding other children of the mother with different partners.