According to the Constitutional Court, shared custody of a minor child by both parents is generally an appropriate solution in terms of unavoidable interference with the constitutionally guaranteed rights of parents and their minor children. However, it should be noted that this is not an automatic solution; the primary criterion in deciding on the custody of minor children is the best interests of the child.
Consequently, compelling and objective reasons (e.g. the specific health and psychological condition of the child or the not negligible distance between the parents) are required to rebut the general presumption that shared custody is appropriate with regard to the best interests of the child. If the parent requesting shared custody is not granted, it is necessary for the court to give convincing reasons for its decision, i.e. to deal with the individual criteria and to explain why the parent was not successful in this particular case.
In addition to the above-mentioned general grounds, the Constitutional Court, in its ruling I. ÚS 3065/21, deals in more detail with some of the criteria that courts should deal with most often. The first important criterion is the age of the minor child; according to the Constitutional Court, the mere reference to the child's younger age cannot be an obstacle to shared custody, unless the child is dependent on the mother for breastfeeding. Similarly, insufficient communication between the parents or the demanding occupation of the parent is not sufficient to refuse shared custody if the parent is in a standard employment relationship and the child attends a pre-school or school. Lastly, it would be worth mentioning the not negligible distance between the mother's and father's homes, where it is the impact of the moves on the child that is decisive, not the mere distance.