Raphael Fisch on 14 August: Which leave requests he filed for his client

Raphael Fisch on 14 August: Which leave requests he submitted for his client

Source-based reconstruction. Private family members are not identified. Office-holders and professionals are mentioned only in their documented function.

On 14 August, Raphael Fisch applied on behalf of the respondent for confirmation of the first week of October, for the rejection of the second week of October with the father, for its allocation to the mother, and for the rejection of any compensation for the August week. The marital protection decision of 17 November 2023 entitles and obliges the father to three holiday weeks per year; no more than seven days may be taken consecutively. The second…

Source basis

What the files show

On 14 August, Raphael Fisch requested, on behalf of the respondent, confirmation of the first week of October, the dismissal of the second week of October with the father, its allocation to the mother and the dismissal of a compensation for the August week. The matrimonial protection decision of 17 November 2023 entitles and obliges the father to three vacation weeks per year; no more than seven days may be taken consecutively.

Application and opposing position

On 14 August Raphael Fisch applied on behalf of the respondent for confirmation of the first week of October, for the dismissal of the second week of October in the father’s favour and its assignment to the mother, and for the dismissal of any compensation for the August week.

The second autumn holiday week from 12 to 18 October is allocated to the mother; the father's regular visitation contacts are suspended during this period.

Checkpoint

The public characterisation is limited to the documented professional act. Personal motives, intentions or character attributions are not established.

LawReport classification

The person is not characterized here, but described on the basis of a documented professional action. Crucial are the date, position, specific motion or decision and the associated primary source. Motives, beliefs or personal characteristics cannot be inferred from this.

What does not follow from this

The documented proceedings substantiate the cited motions, statements and steps in the decision-making process. They do not, without more, establish personal motives, bias, abuse of rights or a general illegality. Such further assessments would require additional legal and factual grounds.

Further posts