Hokkanen v. Finland  | 1994

Reforms to protect family life after a father was separated from his daughter

...the non-enforcement of the applicant’s right of access . . . constituted a breach of his right to respect for family life...

Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, September 1994


Teuvo Hokkanen was a farmer. He and his wife had a daughter, Sini.

Two years later Teuvo’s wife died. Sini’s maternal grandparents then looked after her. According to Teuvo, this was supposed to be a temporary arrangement whilst he dealt with problems caused by his wife’s death. 

Soon afterwards, Sini’s grandparents told Teuvo that they did not intend to give her back to him. Legal disputes took place over custody of the child, lasting for seven years. During this time, the grandparents refused to let Teuvo have any contact with Sini. Teuvo obtained court rulings ordering there to be meetings – but they were not enforced.

Eventually the Finnish courts decided that it was in Sini’s best interests to stay with her grandparents.

Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights

The European court found no grounds to question the Finnish courts’ decision that it was in Sini’s best interests to stay with her grandparents. However, it ruled that Teuvo should have been able to have contact with his daughter.

Indeed, the Finnish courts had ruled that such contact was in Sini’s best interests. Yet the authorities had failed to make sure that there were regular meetings between Teuvo and his daughter.

This had violated Teuvo’s right to family life.   

[The Convention] includes a right for the parent to have measures taken with a view to his or her being reunited with the child and an obligation for the national authorities to take such action.

Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, September 1994


The Finnish authorities took steps to make sure that a similar situation would not happen again. The European court’s judgment was communicated to the relevant government ministries. A seminar was organised for social workers, in which emphasis was placed on avoiding such situations.  The law was also changed to make sure that court rulings in child custody cases would be properly enforced.


Related examples

Father wins battle to see his son - and rights for all Czech parents

When Vladimír Zavřel’s wife left the family home, she took the couple’s six-year-old son and stopped Vladimír seeing him. Vladimír got a court order for contact with his boy, but the authorities failed to enforce it. The European court ruled that this had violated the right to family life. Contact was re-established and the law was changed to prevent similar situations happening again.

Read more

Woman wins landmark case for the rights of single mothers and their children

Paula Marckx was unmarried when she gave birth. She was shocked to find out that, because she was single, her baby girl would not be recognised as hers unless she went through a legal process. Even after this, her daughter would have a reduced legal status and would not inherit from her. The European court ruled this violated their rights – leading to a change in the law.

Read more

Reforms made after mother lost custody of her children simply because of her religion

Ingrid Hoffmann was a Jehovah’s Witness. When she got divorced, a child psychologist advised that she should be given custody of her children, because of their close bond. However, an Austrian court ruled that the father should get custody, because of Ingrid’s religion. The European court ruled that this had been discriminatory – leading to changes to prevent the same thing happening again.

Read more