Thank you to various posters for the clarifications and qualifications.
Now my I test your knowledge and patience a little further. It has been suggested that this is a local legal jurisdiction item, it is unlikely to have little 'practical' effect beyond the case it relates to...............
First, does this ruling create a precedent?
Second, in jurisdictions world-wide that derive from the English legal system cases from other jurisdictions are often referred to in arguments between counsel, e.g. a legal case here in England and Wales (but not Scotland) may refer to a case ruling overseas........ Might this ruling have a possible ripple effect?
Third, some may rightly enjoin others not to 'panick' - their word not mine - but given the proclivity of the EP to behave as a neo-Papal entity, may there not be a temptation on the part of the Phanar to try and milk and legitimise future actions?
Fourth, here in the European Union there are moves afoot which seem to indicate regulation and interference at every level is becoming the perogative of local and national government, plus the European Commission. It is against a backdrop of increasing interference in family life, use of language, so-called human rights legislation, trade, etc., etc., I ask.
(An example, a child under 16 here needing a medical procedure needs parental consent. However such a child may seek and be given advice on sex, contraception, abortion and actually undergo an abortion without the knowledge of her parent(s); both according to law and medical ethics).