Facts
The appellant [X.] and the respondent [Z.] are divorced spouses with a common son [Y.] , born in December 2006. After the separation of the spouses, the consequences of their separation had to be regulated by the court. The District Court of Andelfingen divorced the parties and placed the son under the parental care of the mother. The court ordered that the guardianship established by the matrimonial court be continued to regulate and monitor personal contact. The guardian was to determine the right of access, regulate its modalities, monitor it, and decide on the necessity and duration of a supervised right of access.
The respondent filed a lawsuit to amend the divorce judgment, as the personal contact between him and his son was disputed. The High Court of the Canton of Zurich ruled that the respondent had the right to take his son to his home or to accompany him on visits, and fixed the right of access. The appellant requested that the right of access be denied, as she believed that the son was not stable enough to have contact with the father.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined whether the lower court had rightly ordered personal contact between the father and the son. It found that the lower court had correctly established the facts and that there were no grounds for denying personal contact. The court found that the lower court did not have to obtain an expert opinion on the son's current state of health, as the relevant facts could be clarified in another way.
The Federal Court also rejected the appellant's complaint that the lower court had not considered the report by Dr. med. [V.] . It found that the report was a party report and…