The Convention of Norway, Denmark, Finnland, Iceland and Sweden containment international regulations on marriage, adoption and vergemeel with end-protocol [ Nordic family convention ].

Date	LOL-1931-02-06
Ministry of	The Justis and the Department of Emergency
Last modified	-2008--09-22-1108 from 01.12.2008
Published
Istrontrecation	01.01.1932
Changing
Announcement
Card title	Nordic family-individual convention.

---

Capital overview :

• In -- marriage.
• II. Adoption.
• LII. Vergemeel.
• TWELVE. Almintible regulations.
• End protocol.

---

Additional bedrooms ster 26 March 1953 and 3 nov 1969. -The Convention is ratified for Norway's person according to res. 11 des 1931 The 5 signatars ratification documents blev deposited in Stockholm 22 des 1931, as escrow after agreement between the signacarmakers stepped in instead of it in the convention's species. 23 prescribed exchange of ratifications. The Convention stepped into effect 1 jan 1932.

See Law 19 des 1969 # 75 and res. 19 des 1969 # 1 (with the rolls of 22 des 1969 from the Department of Justice) and res. 14 des 1973 (with the rolls of 31 des 1973).

In -- marriage.

Art 1.Seeking citizen in a contrasting state trial of marriage terms or lysing with one of the other state governments, becomes his right to marry trying for the law in this state, sowed one of the bridal people is settled there, and otherwise by the law in the state where he has citizenship right. Sistmentioned law should still always be used if the person seeks it. Should the right to strike marriage be tried after the state of the state law, the person's authority may demand that the court be granted compensation by the marriage certificate issued by the government of the state of the state.

Required by the trial of the marriage terms in a counterend state after this state law does not consent to marriage from parents or guardian, it shall for person who are settled in a different counterend state's consideration for the consent of such consent after The residence of the residence.

Whether the trial and light of light applies to the Act of the state that the authority of the authority belongs to.

0	Modified at the agreements of 3 nov 1969, 20 nov 1973.

Part Article Art 2.Has trial of marriage terms or lysing taken place with a contrasting state authority, can vigor, as long as the trial or light is valid, taken by another contrasting state authority without any new trial or lysing. This applies regardless of whether the bridal people have the citizenship right in a contratheran state.

Whether the vigor applies to the law in the state that the vigor belongs to.

0	Modified at the agreements of 26 March 1953, 3 nov 1969.

Part Article The Art 3.Formuesrelationship between spouses who are, and when they made marriage, state citizens of a counterend state shall be judged by the law in it of the states where the spouses settled when they made marriage.

Have both spouses later settled in a different contratheran state and been settled there for at least two years, this state's law should come to the use of the anuse instead. Have both spouses earlier during marriage had residence there, or are both spouses of state citizens in that state, shall this state law come to the ancability as soon as they have taken residence there.

0	Changed by agreement 26 jan 2006 # 3 (ikr. 1 des 2008 ifg. announcement 22 sep 2008 number 1108).

Part Article Art 3 a. Spouse who are renegotiated in Article 3, can agreement that the law in a counterparts state where one of them has residence or is a citizen when the agreement is made to be applied to their formute-term relationships. Such the legislof Law can also be entered before marriage.

Whether the one of or both spouses during marriage has taken residence in a different counter-herding state, the spouses also agreement that the law in the counterparts state where they both last had residence at the same time, shall be uses.

0	Added by agreement 26 jan 2006 # 3 (ikr. 1 des 2008 ifg. announcement 22 sep 2008 number 1108).

Part Article Art 3 b. A spouse's right to advise on solid property, what is equal to fixed property, or over residence should always be judged by the law in the contrathersome state where it resides.

0	Added by agreement 26 jan 2006 # 3 (ikr. 1 des 2008 ifg. announcement 22 sep 2008 number 1108).

Part Article Art 3 c. A trade of the law that is applied to the marriage of marriage is without meaning for the legal effects of judicial action taken before the switch.

The validity of the provisions of a spouse is judged nonetheless by the law in the contravening state that is to be applied to the spouse's formability conditions when the question becomes applicable.

0	Added by agreement 26 jan 2006 # 3 (ikr. 1 des 2008 ifg. announcement 22 sep 2008 number 1108).

Part Article Art 4.A legislating Agreement or a prenup between spouses that reacted in Article 3 and 3 a shall be deemed valid with respect to the shape of each and every one of the contravention states about it when it was struck, met the formation requirements in

1.	the law that after article 3 or 3 a was in effect for the spouse's formating relationship or

2.	the rule of law in a counterend state where the spouses or one of them were nationals.

If the law does not have the rights of legislums, the validity of such agreement is judged by such an agreement according to the formation requirements of the spouse.

Any of the states can face a third person to make the validity of a lawmaking agreement or a prenup depending on the fact that it is registered by the rules of this state.

0	Changed by agreement 26 jan 2006 # 3 (ikr. 1 des 2008 ifg. announcement 22 sep 2008 number 1108).

Part Article Art 4 a ; if spouses that reacted in Article 3, later have taken residence in a state that is not controversy, the convention regulations on the marriage of the spouse are not going to be Applicability.

0	Added by agreement 26 jan 2006 # 3 (ikr. 1 des 2008 ifg. announcement 22 sep 2008 number 1108).

Part Article Art 5.Requirement of the opswelling of the formaescommunity mellem spouses as mentioned in Article 4, is decided in the state of the state where both spouses are settled. Do they live in different states, meet the decision in that state, where it against whom the claim has been fixed, has residence, or if he is settled in Finland, in the state whose law efforters Article 3 is the grandparent of the spouse's formureate conditions. Part Article Art 6.Article 3-5 does not concern spouses whose judicial effects take the rule of law in nogen of the on-current states shall be judged by the elderly marriage legislation. Part Article Art 7. Demand for separation or divorce between spouses who are state citizens and has residence in a counterend state, is decided in the state where

1.	The spouses have their residence,

2.	The spouses last had residence at the same time and one of them is still settled,

3.	The spouses are state citizens,

4.	sued has its residence,

5.	where one of the spouses, by joint demands, has its residence,

6.	The plaintiff has his residence and where he has been settled for at least one year immediately before the introduction of the claim, or

7.	The plaintiff is a citizen and has his residence, provided that the plaintiff has been settled there for at least six months immediately before ensuing the claim.

Demand for divorce due to separation can also be decided in the state of the state where the separation is said.

0	Modified at the agreements of 26 March 1953, 6 Feb 2001 (ikr. 1 July 2001 ifg announcement 28 June 2001 No. 740).

Part Article Art 8. In connection with the claims of separation or divorce, the same or other authority may also meet the decision of temporary reporation of the interlife and sharing of the assets. Also, questions about parenthood, where the child is going to be staying fixed and togetherness can be decided

1.	that the child is the spouse of the children, and

2.	that the child has its residence in the state where the claim of separation or divorce is processed.

If the child does not have its residence in the state where the claim of separation or divorce is resolved, questions of parental responsibility, where the child is going to be staying fixed and contested only there about

1.	The child has its residence in a contrathereal state,

2.	The child is the spouse's common child and at least one of the spouses has parental responsibility for the child,

3.	The spouses have accepted that the question is treated in the state where the claim of separation or divorce is taken up, and

4.	it is to the child's best that the question is treated in this state.

In matters of parenthood, where the child is staying firm and togetherness, the competency of the first and other clause shall be competency in accordance with the HaagConvention of 25. October 1980 about the civilian aspects of international child abduction. It shall be taken special consideration for Article 3 and 16 in this Convention.

0	Modified at agreement 6 Feb 2001 (ikr. 1 July 2001 ifg announcement 28 June 2001 No. 740).

Part Article Art 8 a question after article 7 or 8 is set for competent authorities in various counterparts states, between the same parties, shall the authority in which claims were profiled last, following separate measures rejecting the claim to the benefit of the authority in which The claim was first put forward.

A matter of separation and a matter of divorce should be at the inquiry of the first clause is considered to be the same question.

0	Added by agreement 6 Feb 2001 (ikr. 1 July 2001 ifg announcement 28 June 2001 No. 740).

Part Article Art 9.At the treatment of questions after articles 7 and 8, the state of the state is invoking the current law ; questions about sharing of fortune should however always be decided by the law that after Article 3 should be applied to the marriage of the spouse.

Separation that has been achieved in one of the states gives the same right to divorce in the other states, as if it had been achieved there.

In a contratheran state where there are no rules about separation, but where divorce in certain cases is conditioned by a prerequisite time, spouses have been separated in a different counternation state, and who then have lived separate in a date of time that responds to the time of pause, and has not resumed same-life, the right to be divorced without pregoing time of pause.

0	Modified at the agreements of 26 March 1953, 20 nov 1973, 6 Feb 2001 (ikr. 1 July 2001 ifg announcement 28 June 2001 No. 740).

Part Article Art 10.Is it achieved separation between spouses whose fortunes are judged by the law in a counterend state that does not have rules about separation, should fortune as a spouse enlistment after the separation be his distinctive and debt response is calculated by the conditions at the separation. By the way, the rules of this state are given the share of the division after divorce equivalent of the Applicability.

Is a spouse dead after achieved separation that still consisted, the separation shall be equal to divorce, for as far as concerns of reliving marital rights to inheritance after the deceased after the law or testament, when the law in a contrasted state that did not rules about the separation shall be applied.

0	Modified at the agreements of 3 nov 1969, 20 nov 1973.

Part Article

II. Adoption.

Art 11.Will a citizen in one of the contrathersome states, which are settled in one of them, adopting the nogen that has citizenship rights in one of the states, shall the permit be sought in the state where the adoption of the adoption. Part Article Art 12.At the decision of the appeal in each state the current law ; has the one to be adopted, not filled 18 years, and is he settled in the state where he has citizenship, the appeal must not be granted in any other state, without the Child's regulatory authority in the citizenship country has had access to pronounciousness. Part Article Art 13.Questions about the opheal of an adopted relationship, which consists of el-member citizens of the counterparts States, and who are founded in one of these, is decided in the state where the adoption of the adoption of the adoption or if he has not residence in the nogen of the counterparts states, in the state where the adopted one is settled.

By the decision, in each state it is applicable to the current law.

Part Article

LII. Vergemeel.

Art 14.Vergemeel for underage citizen in one of the contrathersome states, which are settled in one of the other, hear under the government of this state, co-stave already being induraves in one of the other states of the legislating or op-mentioned guardian.

The same goes for about the umyndietary and vergemeel for an umnadized.

Part Article Art 15.Temporary guardian can be opmentioned and other temporary premoles meet in any of the states. Part Article Art 16.The decisions that are renegotiated in the articles 14 and 15, meet in each state efall in which the current law. Part Article The Art 17.Court effects of the umynity of the formautenuous regard and vergence's disposal are judged the rule of law in the state where the vergemed athlete is being made.

This provision does not apply to the ability to make commitments efloting weight or check.

Part Article Art 18.A vergemeel can efact the mediation of the person ministries to be transferred to one of the other states, if the insatiable has settled on there, or provided for other reasons exists appropriate. Part Article Art 19.Questions about the ophoral of an umyndietary decision that has been decided in one of the counteredge states, shall, when the umyndietary state has the citizenship right in one of these, is decided in the state where the vergemtarget is being practiced.

By the decision, in each state it is applicable to the current law.

Part Article Art 20.becomes a citizen in one of the countertop states umyndized in one of the others, or becomes the umyndider op-raised, should there without ophyting to the person's ministry in the state where he has state civil rights. Part Article The Art 21.provisions of the articles 17, 19 and 20 are given the equivalent of the Applicability, when a citizen of one of the contravening states, which is settled in Denmark and is not already umyndized in one of the states, is placed under the team-run destination in Denmark.

This vergemeel is not to the hurdles of umyndiation in one of the other states where the person settled for sissible.

Part Article

TWELVE. Almintible regulations.

Art 22:Administrative and judicial judicial decisions, as in one of the states are outfining in accordance with the articles 5, 7, 8, 11, 13, 15, 19 or 21, shall be valid in other states without special staundation and without trial of the decision wealth or authority of the government. The same goes for judicial judicial decisions that are outcompleted in one of the states, and that go out on invalidity or recast of marriage between state citizens in a contraviating state.

0	Modified at agreement 6 Feb 2001 (ikr. 1 July 2001 ifg announcement 28 June 2001 No. 740).

Part Article Art 23.This Convention shall be ratified, and the ratification of the ratification shall be exchanged in Stockholm as soon as happen can.

The Convention takes effect on the 1st January or the 11st of July following the efall exchanges of the ratification.

Any of the states can in relation to each of the other say op Convention with a due date of six months to op-hear the subsequent 1ste January or 1st July.

To the confirmation of the respective, the respective of the respective deputies signed the presence of the near convention and provided it with its seal.

The finishing in Stockholm in one specimen on each of the following spand : Norwegian, Danish, Finnish, Icelandic and Swedish, and for the Swedish sprog the person in two texts, one for Finland and one for Sweden, the 6th February 1931.

Part Article

End protocol.

In connection with the underdrawing today of the Convention of the Convention Norway, Denmark, Finnland, Iceland and Sweden, containment international regulations on marriage, adoption and vergemeel, have the deputies of the controversy for the counterend states. the following statement :

The contrathersome states agree on :

1) that the Convention does not commit the counterlaws of the government to dedicate people as the rule of law in the person's state because of kinship or brother-in-law is prevented from making marriage to each other by a provision that there cannot ditised from ;

2) that the one that has not filled 21 years, but that has become of the age of Finnish law by making marriage or efter Icelandic law by separation or opulation of marriage should not be considered to be inunadorable because of his age, even though he takes residence in another of those counterherding states than respectively, Finland and Iceland respectively.

Stockholm on February 6, 1931.