Living Mother and Consent Problem

Cvita Miletić is not an abstract maternal name. The file must be read against Article 5 of the SAPV Adoption Act: parental consent was required unless legally defined replacement grounds existed. Articles 14 and 17 then required the guardianship authority to verify conditions and reject the adoption if they failed.

Documentary continuation — the specific rules for full adoption

The reference to Article 5 in the original paragraph must be read alongside the specific full-adoption rules, rather than as a complete answer to the 1979 case. In the archived 1976 SAPV Adoption Act, Article 30(1) requires the stated conditions concerning deceased, unknown or abandoning parents; the abandonment route also includes six months without establishing their whereabouts. Article 30(4) requires the other parent’s prior consent where one parent is deceased or unknown. Article 41 expressly includes Article 30(1), (2) and (4) among the conditions relevant to nullity. Article 42 does not include Article 5 in its list of provisions applied to full adoption. A general Article 5 explanation therefore cannot by itself establish that a special guardian could replace the living mother’s prior consent for full adoption.

Read the mother’s actual documentary trail

The Vera Radovanović dossier 3871/79 contains Cvita’s name, the child’s health-insurance connection through her, family contacts and a recorded address. The 1979 adoption record nevertheless relies on her allegedly unknown whereabouts and non-performance of parental duties, and records the special guardian’s consent. The comparison concerns the actual steps taken to establish the statutory conditions, the mother’s prior consent, and the specific grounds used to replace her.

The CSR search report of 9 March 2005 is a separate later source. It records a search in death registers beginning on 1 June 1998. The author’s separate clarification states that Cvita died on 15 June 1997 and that he learned this in 2021. The later search cannot supply a missing contemporaneous consent or identification of the 1979 search steps.

The 2026 judgment, appeal and revision show how the statutory conditions and the mother’s position were subsequently argued and assessed.