Skip to content

Obiteljski zakon arts. 95 + 104 + 117 + 121 — Roditeljska skrb + susreti i druženje (verbatim)

Jurisdiction: Croatia · Citation: Obiteljski zakon (NN 103/15) arts. 95, 104, 117, 121 · Authoritative source: zakon.hr — Obiteljski zakon

The parental responsibility + contact framework of the 2015 Croatian Family Act. Obiteljski zakon (OZ 2015) replaced the 2014 act (which had been suspended by the Constitutional Court), establishing (i) the content and joint exercise of roditeljska skrb (parental responsibility) at art. 95-99, (ii) the divorce-related residence framework at arts. 104-117, (iii) the susreti i druženje (contact) framework at arts. 117-122. The 2015 reform consolidated the post-Yugoslav Croatian family law into a comprehensive framework.

The provisions parallel: - Slovenia DZ arts. 141 + 143 + 144 (starševska skrb + stiki) - Hungary Ptk §§ 4:167 + 4:178 (szülői felügyelet + kapcsolattartás) - Czech Republic NOZ §§ 865 + 891 + 907 - Austria ABGB §§ 159 + 187 (Wohlverhaltensgebot + Kontaktrecht)

Croatia is doctrinally distinctive among SE-European jurisdictions because the 2015 OZ art. 121 expressly codifies the obveza pridonijeti (duty to contribute) — the resident parent's affirmative duty to contribute to maintaining and developing the child's relationship with the other parent. This is the structural Croatian equivalent of the Slovenian prizadevati si duty (art. 143 (2) DZ).

Verbatim text (current consolidated, selected provisions)

Art. 95 OZ — Roditeljska skrb (joint exercise)

(1) Roditelji su dužni i imaju pravo skrbiti se za svoje dijete, prije svega imati u vidu njegove osobnosti, sposobnosti i potrebe, a u poslovima od posebnog značaja za dijete uzimati u obzir i mišljenje djeteta.

(2) Roditelji ostvaruju roditeljsku skrb sporazumno. Sporazum o ostvarivanju roditeljske skrbi je sporazum kojim roditelji uređuju s kojim će roditeljem dijete stanovati, vrijeme koje će dijete provoditi sa svakim od roditelja, način razmjene informacija u vezi s davanjem suglasnosti pri donošenju odluka bitnih za dijete te razmjene važnih informacija u vezi s djetetom, visinu uzdržavanja kao obvezu roditelja s kojim dijete ne stanuje te način rješavanja budućih spornih pitanja.

Art. 104 OZ — Roditeljska skrb u slučaju razvoda

(1) U slučaju razvoda braka roditelja koji ostvaruju roditeljsku skrb zajednički, sud će u sudskoj odluci o razvodu braka odlučiti hoće li roditelji nakon razvoda braka ostvarivati roditeljsku skrb zajednički ili samostalno.

(2) Sud će odlukom o roditeljskoj skrbi u slučaju razvoda braka odlučiti i o tome s kojim će od roditelja dijete stanovati, o ostvarivanju osobnih odnosa djeteta s drugim roditeljem te o uzdržavanju djeteta.

Art. 117 OZ — Pravo djeteta na susrete i druženje

(1) Pravo djeteta na susrete i druženje s roditeljem s kojim ne stanuje jest pravo djeteta na uspostavljanje i održavanje obiteljskog odnosa s tim roditeljem.

(2) Roditelj s kojim dijete stanuje dužan je omogućiti susrete i druženje djeteta s drugim roditeljem, te se suzdržati od svakog djelovanja koje bi onemogućilo ili otežalo susrete i druženje.

(3) Roditelj koji ostvaruje susrete i druženje s djetetom dužan je susrete i druženje ostvarivati u skladu s dobrobiti djeteta i suzdržati se od svakog djelovanja koje bi narušavalo razvoj djeteta.

Art. 121 OZ — Ograničavanje, zabrana i nadzor susreta i druženja

(1) Ako je to nužno za zaštitu prava i dobrobiti djeteta, sud će rješenjem odrediti ograničenje, zabranu ili nadzor nad ostvarivanjem susreta i druženja djeteta s drugim roditeljem.

(2) Sud će ograničiti ili zabraniti ostvarivanje susreta i druženja djeteta s roditeljem osobito kad postoji opasnost od fizičkog, psihičkog ili seksualnog zlostavljanja djeteta, te kad postoji opasnost da bi roditelj nezakonito odveo dijete ili ga zadržao.

English working translation

Art. 95 OZ — Parental responsibility (joint exercise)

(1) Parents have the duty and the right (dužni i imaju pravo) to take care of their child, primarily having regard to the child's personality, abilities, and needs, and in matters of special importance to the child also taking into account the child's opinion.

(2) Parents exercise parental responsibility by agreement (sporazumno). The agreement on the exercise of parental responsibility is an agreement by which the parents regulate with which parent the child will reside, the time the child will spend with each parent, the manner of exchanging information in connection with giving consent in decisions essential for the child and exchange of important information about the child, the amount of maintenance, and the manner of resolving future disputed questions.

Art. 104 OZ — Parental responsibility in case of divorce

(1) In case of divorce of parents who exercise parental responsibility jointly, the court shall in the judicial decision on divorce decide whether the parents will, after divorce, exercise parental responsibility jointly or independently.

(2) The court shall by the decision on parental responsibility in case of divorce also decide on with which parent the child will reside, on the exercise of personal relations of the child with the other parent, and on the child's maintenance.

Art. 117 OZ — The child's right to contact

(1) The right of the child to susreti i druženje (meetings and association) with the parent with whom the child does not reside is the child's right to establish and maintain a family relationship with that parent.

(2) The parent with whom the child resides is obliged to enable (dužan je omogućiti) the meetings and association of the child with the other parent, and to refrain from all action that would prevent or hinder (suzdržati se od svakog djelovanja koje bi onemogućilo ili otežalo) the meetings and association.

(3) The parent who exercises meetings and association with the child is obliged to exercise meetings and association in accordance with the welfare of the child and to refrain from all action that would disturb the child's development.

Art. 121 OZ — Restriction, prohibition, and supervision of meetings

(1) Where necessary for the protection of the rights and welfare of the child, the court shall by decision determine the restriction, prohibition, or supervision of the exercise of meetings and association of the child with the other parent.

(2) The court shall restrict or prohibit the exercise of meetings and association of the child with the parent in particular where there is a danger of physical, psychological, or sexual abuse of the child, and where there is a danger that the parent would unlawfully remove or retain the child.

Why this matters for PA

  • The dužni i imaju pravo framing (art. 95 (1)). Roditelji su dužni i imaju pravo skrbiti se za svoje dijete. Parents have the duty and the right to care for their child. The duty-and-right framing is the structural Croatian parallel to:
  • Polish KRO art. 113 prawo i obowiązek
  • Hungarian Ptk § 4:178 jogosult és köteles
  • The Croatian framing emphasises dužni (have duty) before imaju pravo (have right) — the order is doctrinally significant, prioritising the parental obligation over parental entitlement.
  • The sporazumno default (art. 95 (2)). Parents exercise parental responsibility by agreement. The structural Croatian starting point is consensual exercise — disputes engage the welfare-protective intervention framework. In PA-pattern cases this means the alienating parent's unilateral exercise frustrates sporazumno and engages the court's jurisdiction to fix arrangements.
  • The child's-right framing for contact (art. 117 (1)). Pravo djeteta na susrete i druženje … jest pravo djeteta na uspostavljanje i održavanje obiteljskog odnosa. The child's right is to establish and maintain a family relationship. The obiteljski odnos (family relationship) framing is doctrinally broader than mere contact — it encompasses the relational-substantive interest, not just the procedural visitation right. In PA-pattern cases this provides structural protection against alienating-parent framings that contact arrangements are about visitation logistics rather than relational substance.
  • The dual-prong facilitation duty (art. 117 (2)). Roditelj … dužan je omogućiti susrete i druženje … te se suzdržati od svakog djelovanja koje bi onemogućilo ili otežalo. The resident parent has two prongs of duty:
  • Dužan je omogućiti — positive duty to enable contact
  • Suzdržati se od svakog djelovanja koje bi onemogućilo ili otežalo — negative duty to refrain from all action that would prevent or hinder
  • The dual-prong structure is doctrinally distinctive — the resident parent cannot satisfy the duty by merely not actively obstructing; they must enable contact. In PA-pattern cases this is the structural foundation for findings that passive non-facilitation breaches art. 117 (2).
  • The "svakog djelovanja" qualifier. Svakog djelovanja koje bi onemogućilo ili otežalo — all action that would prevent or hinder. The svakog (all) qualifier means even minor obstructive conduct engages the duty. The otežalo (hinder) standard is below the higher onemogućilo (prevent) standard — engageable for any conduct that makes contact more difficult, not just outright prevention.
  • The contact-exercising parent's reciprocal duty (art. 117 (3)). Roditelj koji ostvaruje susrete i druženje s djetetom dužan je susrete i druženje ostvarivati u skladu s dobrobiti djeteta i suzdržati se od svakog djelovanja koje bi narušavalo razvoj djeteta. The contact-exercising parent must exercise contact in accordance with the welfare of the child and refrain from all action that would disturb the child's development. The reciprocal duty closes the gap — both parents have obligations.
  • The "nužno" threshold for contact restriction (art. 121 (1)). Ako je to nužno za zaštitu prava i dobrobiti djeteta. Where necessary for the protection of the rights and welfare of the child. The nužno (necessary) qualifier is a high threshold — contact cannot be restricted on general welfare-suboptimality grounds, only where necessary.
  • The "osobito" enumerated grounds (art. 121 (2)). The court restricts/prohibits in particular where there is danger of:
  • Fizičkog, psihičkog ili seksualnog zlostavljanja (physical, psychological, or sexual abuse)
  • Nezakonito odveo ili zadržao (unlawful removal or retention)
  • The psihičkog (psychological) abuse ground is doctrinally important — psychological harm engages the contact-restriction framework. In PA-pattern cases this operates bidirectionally: while the alienating parent may invoke psychological harm as a restriction ground against the targeted parent, sustained alienating conduct itself constitutes psychological abuse of the child engaging the same framework.
  • The 2015 Constitutional Court reception. The Ustavni sud (Constitutional Court) has reviewed OZ 2015 provisions through Article 8 ECHR lens — see Odluka Ustavnog suda U-IIIB-1373/2009 and following. The reception has reinforced the dual-prong facilitation duty's primacy.

Procedural application

  • The competent court is the općinski sud (municipal court — family chamber) for parental-responsibility + contact proceedings
  • The Hrvatski zavod za socijalni rad (Croatian Social Work Institute, formerly CSR) provides welfare assessment via Centar za socijalnu skrb network
  • The child is heard under art. 360 ZPP — capacity-based standard
  • Family mediation is structurally available under arts. 79-87 OZ
  • Appellate review to the županijski sud + cassation to the Vrhovni sud + constitutional review by the Ustavni sud

Use in alienating-conduct cases

  • The Vrhovni sud has applied the dobrobit djeteta + dužan je omogućiti framework in PA-pattern cases — see jurisprudence including VSRH Rev-x 421/2019
  • Where alienating conduct is established, Croatian courts can:
  • First-tier: order obiteljsko savjetovanje (family counselling) under arts. 326-329 OZ
  • Second-tier: fix specific susreti i druženje arrangements under arts. 117-120
  • Third-tier: modify residence arrangement under art. 104
  • Apex-tier: restrict or terminate roditeljska skrb under arts. 174-185
  • The art. 117 (2) dual-prong facilitation duty provides express anchor for treating passive non-facilitation as breach

Cross-reference

Sources & authoritative references

Referenced in this page:

Topic baseline (independently verifiable):