6. Material interests

410. The proposed deportation of a person suffering from serious illness to his country of origin in face of doubts as to the availability of appropriate medical treatment there, would have constituted a violation of Article 8 (Paposhvili v. Belgium [GC], §§ 221-226).

d. Residence permits58

411. Neither Article 8 nor any other provision of the Convention can be construed as guaranteeing, as such, the right to the granting of a particular type of residence permit, provided that a solution offered by the authorities allows the individual concerned to exercise without obstacles his or her right to respect for private and/or family life (B.A.C. v. Greece, § 35). In particular, if a residence permit allows the holder to reside within the territory of the host country and to exercise freely there the right to respect for his or her private and family life, the granting of such a permit represents in principle a sufficient measure to meet the requirements of Article 8. In such cases, the Court is not empowered to rule on whether the individual concerned should be granted one particular legal status rather than another, that choice being a matter for the domestic authorities alone (Hoti v. Croatia, § 121).

6. Material interests

412.

“Family life” does not include only social, moral or cultural relations; it also comprises interests of a material kind, as is shown by, among other things, maintenance obligations and the position occupied in the domestic legal systems of the majority of the Contracting States by the institution of the reserved portion of an estate (in French, “réserve héréditaire”). The Court has thus accepted that the right of succession between children and parents, and between grandchildren and grandparents, is so closely related to family life that it comes within the ambit of Article 8 (Marckx v. Belgium, § 52; Pla and Puncernau v. Andorra, § 26). According to Şerife Yiğit v. Turkey [GC], questions of inheritance and voluntary dispositions between near relatives appear to be intimately connected with family life (§ 95). Article 8 does not, however, require that a child should be entitled to be recognised as the heir of a deceased person for inheritance purposes (Haas v. the Netherlands, § 43). 413. The Court has held that the granting of family allowance enables States to “demonstrate their respect for family life” within the meaning of Article 8; the allowance therefore comes within the scope of that provision (Fawsie v. Greece, § 28), including parental allowances, child benefits, maternity benefit, allowance for minor children (see the case-law references in Yocheva and Ganeva v. Bulgaria, § 72). 414. However, the Court has found that the concept of family life is not applicable to a claim for damages against a third party following the death of the applicant’s fiancée (Hofmann v. Germany (dec.)). 415. “Family life” is also closely interrelated with the protection of “home” or “private life” when it comes, for instance, to attack on houses and destruction of belongings (Burlya and Others v. Ukraine) or to eviction (Hirtu and Others v. France, § 66).

58 See the Guide on Immigration.