Constitutional Court: A provisional custody order may not be issued without giving the other parent an opportunity to be heard

In the case at hand, the court ruled on a summer custody arrangement without serving the mother with the other parent’s motion or allowing her to comment on it before issuing the decision. The Constitutional Court found this to be a violation of the right to judicial protection and the principle of equality of the parties. It emphasized that an interim decision differs from earlier preliminary measures precisely in its greater emphasis on the procedural rights of the parties. The law intentionally limits the element of surprise, and moreover, a standard appeal is not admissible against a provisional decision. This makes it all the more important that both parents be given a real opportunity to present their version of the situation to the court before a decision is made.

This is yet another of the decisions through which the Constitutional Court is gradually interpreting the new institution of the interim decision, introduced in 2026. In previous case law, the Court had already emphasized that the court must inform all parties of the motion in a timely manner, allow them to express their views, and take steps to ascertain the child’s opinion. The new ruling reaffirms these rules even in the specific context of a short-term change in summer care arrangements. For parental disputes, the conclusion is practical: even the need for a quick, temporary adjustment to custody arrangements generally does not entitle the court to decide solely on the basis of one parent’s claims without giving the other parent an opportunity to respond.