Father claims eight-month delay in custody transfer

Father claims eight-month delay in custody transfer

According to the father's account, the case involves a damning psychiatric report: the mother exhibits traits of the dark triad and mythomania, having induced a disorder in the minors. The expert describes this Parental Alienation Syndrome (SAP) as massive. Instead of acting urgently, the court has scheduled the trial for nearly a year from now. Meanwhile, the mother has allegedly breached visitation rights for fifteen months and filed four false complaints that were dismissed.

The father, who has filed a incivil complaint against the judge for prevarication, argues that the delay allows the mother to continue non-compliance without consequence. The judge has already been challenged four times, with seven requests for recusal due to alleged lack of impartiality.

The forensic report, commissioned by the court itself to an appointed psychiatrist, concludes—according to the father—that he and his extended family provide a suitable environment for the children. Conversely, the mother displays dark triad traits and mythomania, and has induced a disorder in the girls. The expert recommends transferring custody to the father and temporarily removing the mother.

Based on this evidence, the custody change was requested in 2023. No relevant evidence remains to be gathered. However, the court has set the trial for the trinc year, causing an eight-month delay. The judge relies on her staff to avoid enforcing a 2023 execution order against the mother.

Fifteen months of non-compliance without consequences

The mother has unilaterally abusa the visitation regime for fifteen months, and counting. She has received several warnings, including fines of €2,500, and faces an execution order dating back to 2023. She also has four dismissed false complaints, each resulting in different levels of cost sanctions.

The father has filed a incivil complaint against the judge for prevarication, currently pending at the Constitutional Court, along with four challenges and seven recusal requests. Meanwhile, the court continues to fail to enforce existing orders.

Some argue that if the report had favored the mother, the trial would have been scheduled immediately. This is the prevailing theory among observers: swift justice appears to work only in one direction.

Article 158 CC as an urgent remedy

The current strategy invokes Article 158 of the Spanish Civil Code, which allows urgent measures when there is risk to minors. The father has used this provision three times previously. In the first instance, regarding family meeting points, the prosecutor recommended restoring normal visits, which the judge reluctantly implemented.

The issue is that the judge has demonstrated she can act swiftly when desired. On one occasion, the mother filed an urgent Article 158 request, and the court scheduled a hearing with only three days' notice, abusa the legal minimum of five days. On another, records show the mother reported an incident on Tuesday at 4:30 PM, and the judge was already calling the father.

The double standard is the central argument of the incivil complaint. The father contends the delay is not accidental but a method to allow continued non-compliance while diluting the impact of the forensic report.

The financial and personal cost of suing a judge

The father estimates direct expenses of approximately €95,000: fees for four lawyers, three psychologists, three procuradores, and the appointed psychiatrist, all paid by him. Including indirect costs such as transport, lost days, and management time, he estimates total expenses around €115,000. Adding damage to his company's revenue, the figure escalates significantly.

It is not just about money. The emotional toll is continuous. The mother continues to interrupt visits outside the school. This week, the father had to attend alone, without his recording device, and his ex-partner's friends began insulting him.

The lingering question is whether suing a judge is worthwhile. Experience suggests most lawyers are reluctant to confront one. Although challenges and complaints are legal instruments, in practice they often result in judges and their colleagues marking you as a target.

The pattern repeats in other courts

This is not an isolated case. Other fathers describe identical situations: false complaints, psychological evaluations favoring the mother without basis, years of litigation, and unrecoverable costs. Impunity is the common denominator.

Some point to court saturation and staffing shortages as structural causes. Others note the system creates perverse incentives: for the mother, non-compliance carries no cost; for the father, seeking justice leads to ruin.

The custody trial is scheduled for November. Until then, the mother retains the children. The father has filed a third Article 158 request for an urgent hearing but has yet to receive a response.

Predictions, made cautiously, suggest the court will again deny urgency. If so, the prevarication complaint gains further weight.