Concerning K.S. vs Denmark for violation of article 17 of CEDAW.

The author and her Danish husband, H., had a son, C. In 2007, author went to the US because her father was ill. Meanwhile, H. applied for sole custody of C. Thus the author came back to Denmark to fight for C.

In court, the judge favoured H. because the author was not allowed to use her notes in Danish, which she needed because she was not fluent in the language, whereas her former husband, a Dane, was permitted to read from his notes. The author not only lost her custody of C, she also could not have any visitation or even telephone or online contact with her son. Even after making an agreement on visitation rights, with the support of the Danish authorities, H. is demanding that the authors visitations take place in Denmark, under his supervision, and that online communication be ended. The author thus asked the enforcement court to authorize her visitation rights. Her request was rejected and thus a complaint was sent to CEDAW.
Due to insufficient explanations, documents or evidence from both the author as well as the State party, the Committee considers that, it cannot conclude that the author has exhausted all available domestic remedies for purposes of admissibility. Thus the Committee declares this communication to be inadmissible.