Raphael Fisch on the August week: Why he had a compensation declined
Source-based reconstruction. Private family members are not identified. Officeholders and professionals are mentioned only in their documented function.
The legal opinion considered compensation for the missed August week unwarranted and, alternatively, proposed the first week of the Christmas holidays subject to the holiday rule. 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 legal opinion considered compensation for the missed August week as not indicated and, alternatively, proposed the first week of the Christmas holidays subject to the holiday regulation. The requested holiday week from 3 to 9 August 2026 did not take place.
Application and opposing position
The legal opinion considered compensation for the missed week in August unnecessary and, alternatively, proposed the first week of the Christmas holidays subject to the public holiday rules.
As a further holiday block, the court sets the period from 28 December 2026 to 3 January 2027 with the father.
“Compensation ... not shown”
Checkpoint
The public characterization is limited to the documented professional conduct. Personal motives, intentions or attributions of character are not substantiated.
LawReport classification
The person is not characterized here, but described on the basis of a documented professional action. Decisive are the date, function, the specific motion or decision and the associated primary source. Motives, beliefs or personal characteristics cannot be inferred from this.
What does not follow therefrom
The documented proceedings substantiate the aforementioned motions, statements and decisions. They do not, however, as such establish personal motives, bias, abuse of rights or a general unlawfulness. Such further assessments would require additional legal and factual grounds.
Further posts