The letter dated 4 June: choice of an autumn week and set deadline

The letter dated 4 June: selection of an autumn week and deadline set

Source-based reconstruction. Private family members are not identified. Officeholders and professionals are mentioned only in their documented capacity.

In the letter dated 4 June an offer was made to choose either the first or the second week of the autumn holidays; at the same time it was stated that the other week should be spent with the mother. By letter dated 9 June the letter of 4 June was answered, the holiday registration was upheld and expressly no waiver was declared.

Sources

What the files show

In the letter of 4. Juni it was offered to choose either the first or the second week of the autumn holidays; at the same time it was stated that the other week should take place with the mother.

Application and opposing position

For this aspect, no separate additional request is determinative; the analysis compares the documented case file status with the outcome.

By letter dated 9 June, the letter dated 4 June was replied to, the holiday registration was upheld, and no waiver was expressly declared.

“either Ferien 2 or Ferien 3”

Checkpoint

The files do not answer in the abstract when an admissible counteroffer turns into a de facto right of selection or veto; they do, however, show which options were concretely offered, rejected and judicially determined.

LawReport classification

The files show a genuine interpretive conflict: on the one hand, no party is to have a unilateral right to determine; on the other hand, the father was offered a choice between two options accepted by the opposing party. It must be examined whether the refusal of a counterproposal may be regarded as a lack of cooperation without thereby effectively creating a unilateral determination.

What does not follow therefrom

The documented records substantiate the stated motions, statements and decision steps. They do not, without more, demonstrate personal motives, bias, abuse of rights or a general unlawfulness. Such further assessments would require additional legal and factual grounds.

Further articles