Facts
Spouses B. and C. have been in divorce proceedings since November 2014 before the Civil Court of the District of East Vaud. They have two daughters, A. (2005) and D. (2010). In August 2019, mother C. announced her intention to leave U. to settle in the canton of Schwyz as of September 1, 2019.
On August 19, 2019, B.'s counsel informed the Court that child A. had contacted a lawyer, Ms. F., to represent her in the proceedings. On August 29, he specified that, under Art. 299 para. 3 CPC, a representative should be appointed for A., who was the originator of the request.
On August 30, 2019, the President of the Court awarded custody of the children to the mother and regulated the right of access. On September 4, 2019, A. requested that Ms. F. be appointed as her representative guardian.
On September 20, 2019, the Civil Court of Appeal rejected the request for the appointment of Ms. F. as A.'s representative guardian. On November 4, 2019, the President of the Civil Court refused to appoint a representative guardian for A. On December 10, 2019, the Civil Appeals Chamber of the Cantonal Court dismissed A.'s appeal against this decision.
Considerations
The Federal Tribunal considers that the decision refusing to appoint a representative for the child in matrimonial proceedings (Art. 299 para. 3 CPC) is an interim decision, but one that causes irreparable harm within the meaning of Art. 93 para. 1 let. a LTF. Indeed, the lack of a representative guardian is likely to influence the course of the main…