Bill no. 1106 on the promotion and supervision of alternating residence for children of separated parents

On 11 April 2025, the Government tabled Bill no. 1106 on the promotion and supervision of alternating residence of children of separated parents (2025-2, 25 March 2025), which is the result of the transformation of (parliamentary) Draft Law no. 261, which had been adopted on 27 June 2024 by the Parliament (Conseil national).

Referred to the the Committee on Women's Rights, the Family and Equality (CDFFE), the bill amending articles 303-2 and 303-3 of the Civil Code was passed on 18 June 2025.

* * *

SUMMARY

Alternating residence was introduced into the Civil Code by Law no. 1.450 of 4 July 2017, in line with the Principality's international commitments, in particular article 3 of the New York Convention of 20 November 1989 on the Rights of the Child (in force in Monaco since 21 July 2013), which enshrines the best interests of the child.

Until this reform, the guardianship judge ("juge tutélaire") could only order alternating residence in the event of mutual agreement between the father and mother.

From now on, where it is in the best interests of the child, the guardianship judge will be able where justified by the child's best interests, to fix the child's habitual residence alternately at the home of each of the father and mother, even in the absence of their agreement.

In principle, the judge's decision is final. However, he may order alternating residence on a provisional basis for a period that he determines, at the end of which he will give a final ruling.

The CDFFE's report on the bill states that "by virtue of the adversarial principle, if alternating residence is ordered ex officio, at the judge's initiative, the parents must be systematically invited to present their observations and to provide any documents they consider useful in support of their claims".

The Report also points out that "in the event of alternating residence of the child at the home of each of the father and mother, which is effectively implemented, family allowances and social benefits are paid equally to each of them, unless a written agreement between the parents or a court decision designates the parent to whom the allowances are to be paid in full’". The judge is not obliged to give a ruling.

* * *

The Explanatory Memorandum reiterates that the opinion of the child concerned is taken into account during the proceedings before the guardianship judge, "a fortiori when he or she makes a request on the basis of the second paragraph of article 303-6 of the Civil Code". In this regard, it refers to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (judgment of 9 April 2019, Case V. v Slovenia, 878/13), which "specifies that, despite the child's wishes, States have a positive obligation to propose alternative solutions that promote the maintenance or resumption of ties between a parent and his or her minor child" (Explanatory Memorandum, p. 4).

The best interests of the child are taken into account by the guardianship judge "so that the child can maintain regular and healthy relations with both parents where this is possible and is in the child's best interests, while enshrining, if possible, equality in the exercise of their parental rights" (Explanatory Memorandum, p. 5).

* * *