Jolanda Genton: Why the decision did not anticipate any further agreement
Source-based reconstruction. Private family members are not identified. Officeholders and professionals are mentioned only in their documented capacity.
The decision assumes that, given the course of events to date, no independent agreement between the parents concerning the remaining holidays in 2026 is to be expected. The requested holiday week from 3 to 9 August 2026 did not take place. As an additional holiday block, the court sets the period from 28 December 2026 to 3 January 2027 with the father.
Source basis
What the files show
The decision assumes that, in view of the course of events to date, no independent agreement between the parents regarding the remaining holidays in 2026 can be expected. The requested holiday week from 3 to 9 August 2026 did not take place.
Request and opposing position
For this aspect, no independent additional application is determinative; the analysis compares the documented state of the file with the result.
As a further holiday block, the court fixes the period from 28 December 2026 to 3 January 2027 with the father.
“not to assume that the parents will succeed in reaching an agreement ... themselves”
Checkpoint
The public classification remains limited to the documented professional act. Personal motives, intentions or character attributions are not evidenced.
LawReport classification
The person is not characterized here, but described on the basis of a documented professional act. What matters are the date, function, specific motion or decision and the corresponding primary source. Motives, convictions or personal characteristics cannot be inferred from this.
What does not follow from that
The documented records substantiate the mentioned motions, statements and decision-making steps. They do not, by themselves, establish personal motives, bias, abuse of law or a general unlawfulness. Such further assessments would require additional legal and factual grounds.
Further posts