Care order and contact rights
Supreme Court judgment 27 March 2020, HR-2020-662-S, (case no. 00-000000SIV-HRET), appeal against X Court of Appeal's judgment 24 June 2019.
A, B (Counsel Anders Brosveet) v. Y municipality (Counsel Mette Yvonne Larsen)
(Assisting counsel advokat Bendik Falch-Koslung), KS (third-party intervener) (Counsel Frode Lauareid).
Participating in accordance with section 30-13 of the Dispute Act: The State represented by the Ministry of Justice and Public Security (The Office of the Attorney General represented by Marius Emberland), (Assisting counsel Henriette Lund Busch)
Justices: Øie, Matningsdal, Møse, Matheson, Falkanger, Normann, Bull, Kallerud, Ringnes, Bergh, Østensen Berglund
The Court of Appeal had upheld the County Social Welfare Board's decision to issue a care order for a child born in 2017. The Supreme Court, having heard the appeal as a grand chamber together with two other child welfare cases, HR-2020-661-S and HR-2020-663-S, found after an individual assessment that the parents were neither invidually nor jointly able to take proper care of the child. In the event of a revocation of the care order, satisfactory conditions for the child could also not be created by other measures. The conditions for issuing a care order under section 4-12 of the Child Welfare Act were therefore met. With regard to contact rights, the Supreme Court stated that the ultimate goal of family reunification implied that the contact rights should be extensive enough to strengthen and develop the child's bonds to its parents, while not so extensive that it would pose a risk of harm to the child. Contact sessions were set to eight times a year under supervision.