Interim Measures in Family Law in Slovakia

Interim (urgent) measures are issued in situations where is a need for temporary adjustment of relations. The purpose of an urgent measure is a quick and flexible solution to a situation that requires immediate court intervention.

The purpose of an urgent measure is, a temporary adjustment of the conditions of the participants, which fundamentally comes into consideration in those cases in which the situation of acute interference with the rights or legitimate interests of the participant seeking protection by an urgent measure is to be corrected, i.e. if waiting for a decision in the main case (by a judgment after properly conducted evidence) could cause damage to the rights of the petitioner or there is another serious reason, for which it seems necessary to stabilize the situation in a certain way even before the final decision. The urgent measure is also preliminary in the sense that it does not prejudge the rights of participants and third parties.

Q: Can you introduce the interim measures shortly in your country? Can you apply the interim measured in child cases, maintenance cases, contact rights and property cases? What are the requirements?

In Slovakia interim measures are used frequently. They can be issued even before the regular case started, during the case or even after the case was finished. They can be issues also in enforcement procedures. We use it most frequently for contact right during the case in case there are problems between parents to agree on them or on maintenance in case one parent is not contributing financially.

In Slovakia we have two different Procedural codes – one is Civil Non-Litigation Procedural Code where the issues as children, abductions, alimony, enforcement are covered and the other one is Civil Litigation Procedural Code which we use in case of property issues – also marital property divisions.

In both codes in family law issues the interim measures have the aim to provide accelerated temporary adjustment of legal rights.

Three types of interim measures:

1. If a minor finds himself without any care or if his life, health, and development are in danger, the court shall, by an urgent measure, order that the minor be temporarily, for a maximum of six months, entrusted to the care of a natural person or a foster care. In this case the court has 24 hours to decide. This urgent measure is enforceable right after the judge issues the order, without the need of delivery. Mostly it is delivered during enforcement.

2. As an urgent measure, the court can also order that parent who has the minor hands over the minor to the care of other parent, or to shared custody of both parents. In this case the court has 7 days to decide. However, custody interim orders are very rare in practice. Mostly interim measures are used for contact rights until the case is finalised, for alimony or travel bans.

3. all others - shall be issued within 30 days since the application is filled

Interim measures are usually enforceable by delivery to both parties, only in some cases are enforceable right by issuing.

The requirements for interim order petition are: the urgency of the situation and providing facts justifying the need for immediate adjustment of conditions or the fear that execution will be threatened. Sufficient evidence needs to be provided too.

Q: What kind of actions is the court doing to get the relevant status quo information? Is there an informative meeting, or social services involved? Or the court relies only on the documents and statement provided by one party? Is the application delivered to another party to provide contra arguments?

The claim (or right) to which temporary protection is to be provided does not need to be undoubtedly proven, but it must be proven. The court does not find out all the facts when deciding on it, which it would have to find out in the case of a final decision on the merits. The court will limit itself to certifying the most basic facts from which the necessity of a temporary adjustment of conditions can be deduced, while it is always necessary to assess whether this temporary adjustment of conditions does not interfere with the fundamental rights of individual participants beyond the necessary extent and whether the temporary adjustment of conditions pursues a legitimate goal (proportionality principle).

When ordering it, the requirement of speed prevails over the requirement of completeness of factual findings. As a result, all the facts that the court should have ascertained before issuing a decision in the main matter are not ascertained here, because such evidence goes beyond the scope of the proceedings in the part on the order of an urgent measure, as it is contrary to the meaning of immediate and rapid protection of the child.

In the proceedings for the order of an urgent measure, the evidence has the nature of certification, the court ascertains the most significant facts, which subsequently meet the attribute of high probability, and the court bases its decision on them.

In Practice the court might contact the social service to call parents and the child and provide report about the status quo. The reason is to verify the information given in the application for urgent measure. There is also an option to organize an informative meeting on the court of both parents to shortly discuss the situation.

The interim order application is not delivered to opposite party for arguments, the judge decides based on the facts and evidence provided and might ask the social services for report.

Q: What if the interim order was issued based on false information given? How easy/difficult is it to get a change?

An appeal against the interim order decision is possible. In case there were false information used the appeal court is likely to change the order or deny the application as whole.

Every interim order can be cancelled or changed based on a separate application anytime during the procedure if circumstances change. Cancellation of a preliminary measure is possible in case of the disappearance of the reasons for which it was ordered or a change in the conditions that were relevant for its order compared to the situation decisive at the time of its order.

Q: What about interim measures in abduction cases based on Hague Convention? What about travel ban interim orders to prevent abductions?

In Abduction cases there is very common to issue interim order for contacts with the leave-behind parent in order to prevent any further damage that could occur to the minor if he had no or only minimal contact. According to Civil Non-Litigation Procedural, the court will take appropriate measures to ensure the conditions for the minor's return even ex-officio. The court can decide on a temporary adjustment of the petitioner's contact with the minor. The court decides on the adoption of appropriate measures without delay, usually without questioning the participants.

Slovak courts like to issue the travel bans even during the Hague Convention cases to secure the calm situation during the case and to prevent the child from being taken to another country. The travel ban applies usually issued to both parents. The order of such an appropriate measure is necessary so that the parents or any other person requested by any of the parents cannot leave the territory of the Slovak Republic.

Issuing a travel ban is possible also by separate application in case there is a threat that the child living in Slovakia will be taken to another country by one of the parents. Usually, it is issued one there already was abduction and the child returns. In that case the travel ban is issued only to one parent – the abductor.

Q: Contact right interim order – What is the practice in your country – will the contact right interim order be issued only in case there is zero contact between one parent and another?

The contact interim orders are the most used interim orders in practice. Their aim is to prevent any further damage that could occur to the minor if he had no or only minimal contact with one parent. For example now Christmas time is coming and we are busy with interim order application for clients for Christmas season, in case no agreement is possible.

Q: Maintenance interim order – how is this calculated? Or it is only some minimum standard for the child/wife and the calculation will be done later during the case?

With an urgent measure, the court can order the payment of alimony / maintenance only in the minimum necessary amount.

The scope of alimony is fundamentally different from its scope in the final decision. Alimony is determined to the extent necessary and is intended only to satisfy the basic life needs of a minor child, while it is not decisive that the parent is able to pay alimony on a larger scale.

Due to the incomplete results of the evidence, or only the certification of decisive facts, to the extent necessary for maintenance.

When ordering an urgent measure, the court does not have to, and due to the shortness of time, cannot even carry out evidence in the same form and scope as when deciding on the merits. Only in the proceedings in the main case will proper evidence be carried out, within which the personal, property and earnings conditions of the parents of minor children will be established, all decisive facts will be properly established, and the court will be able to decide on the merits of the matter on the amount of alimony, while primarily following the interest of minor children.

Q: Is there any difference between the main proceeding and interim measures? What about the evidence needed and performed?

Sure. The claim (or right) to which temporary protection is to be provided does not need to be undoubtedly proven, but it must be proven. The court does not find out all the facts when deciding on it, which it would have to find out in the case of a final decision on the merits. The court will limit itself to certifying the most basic facts from which the necessity of a temporary adjustment of conditions can be deduced, while it is always necessary to assess whether this temporary adjustment of conditions does not interfere with the fundamental rights of individual participants beyond the necessary extent and whether the temporary adjustment of conditions pursues a legitimate goal (proportionality principle).

When ordering it, the requirement of speed prevails over the requirement of completeness of factual findings. As a result, all the facts that the court should have ascertained before issuing a decision in the main matter are not ascertained here, because such evidence goes beyond the scope of the proceedings in the part on the order of an urgent measure, as it is contrary to the meaning of immediate and rapid protection of the child.

In the proceedings for the order of an urgent measure, the evidence has the nature of certification, that is, the acting court, based on the available evidence, ascertains the most significant facts, which subsequently meet the attribute of high probability, and the court bases its decision on them.

Q: Are there any interesting cases you dealt with, and you would like to share with us?

My interesting case is a case of child abduction where the mother abducted 3 times the child to Slovakia during the period of 3 years. She abducted the child in 2019 and court ordered her to return, and she did.

Then she second time abducted the child in 2021 and was again return after proper procedure for return.

And she came again in 2022 abducting the child again, third time. In that time, we did not use the proper procedure for return but we tried to use the interim measured for securing the return of the child. And we were successful.

The difference was that in the first two abduction the child was not entrusted to any of the parents to the custody. Both parents were living together and actually return to live together even after the first and second abduction. But once she came back from the second abduction the father already filled for custody and got a full custody right and even the mother was deprived of her parental rights to decide on behalf of the child due to her previous actions.

During the third abduction the child was entrusted to full custody of father, mother was deprived even from her parental rights and had a travel ban. But somehow, she found out how to get out of country (Swiss). The criminal police were involved too. Social services received the alert from the criminal police took the child and the court issued 24h interim order to place the child in foster care. Then the father came to pick the child and the court issued another interim order to hand over the child from the foster care to the father, who took the child back home.