Strasbourg Observers

View posts from: LGBT Rights

  • Dr. Mateusz Wąsik

Przybyszewska and Others v. Poland: A Milestone for Poland while a Tiny Brick for Other Countries

January 16, 2024

by Dr. Mateusz Wąsik ‘Member States are required to provide a legal framework allowing same‑sex couples to be granted adequate recognition and protection of their relationship’, ruled the ECtHR in the latest judgment for same-sex couples in the case of Przybyszewska and Others v. Poland  on 12 December 2023. Academics and practitioners may say nihil […]

  • Ignatius Yordan Nugraha

Consolidating the Legal Recognition and Protection of Same-Sex Couples: Koilova and Babulkova v. Bulgaria

November 07, 2023

by Ignatius Yordan Nugraha In today’s globalised world, a marriage contracted abroad is not a peculiar phenomenon. Same-sex couples from countries such as Bulgaria or Romania may decide to tie the knot in a country where same-sex marriage has been legalised to start a family life. These couples, however, face a major legal hurdle not […]

  • Dr. Andy Hayward

Maymulakhin and Markiv v. Ukraine – A Case of Love Conquering All?

July 04, 2023

by Dr. Andy Hayward, Durham Law School, Durham University, a.p.hayward@durham.ac.uk Following the important Grand Chamber decision in Fedotova and Others v. Russia, the Strasbourg Court has handed down two significant decisions on the legal recognition of same-sex couples. In Buhuceanu and Others v. Romania, the Court developed the principles established in Fedotova and weaponised the […]

  • Giulio Fedele

More protection than recognition for same-sex couples in Buhuceanu and Others v Romania

May 30, 2023

by Giulio Fedele, University of Rome “La Sapienza”, giulio.fedele@uniroma1.it With its latest decision in the case of Buhuceanu and Others v. Romania on 23 May 2023, the European Court of Human Rights returned to the subject of same-sex couples and legal recognition. To no-one’s surprise, the Court confirmed what it had already established just five […]

  • Alberto Godioli

Humour and Symbolic Violence: Canal 8 v. France

April 07, 2023

by Alberto Godioli In her concurring opinion to Patrício Monteiro Telo de Abreu v. Portugal (No. 42713/15, judgment of 7 June 2022), Judge Julia Motoc highlighted the importance of recognising the harm caused by what she referred to as ‘symbolic violence’ against women – namely the circulation and reinforcement of disparaging sexist stereotypes (see Balzaretti 2022 for a more detailed […]

  • Titouan Berhaut-Streel & Charly Derave

Blood donation by men having sexual intercourse with other men: a prospective analysis of Drelon v. France

March 21, 2023

By Titouan Berhaut-Streel & Charly Derave On 8 September 2022, the European Court of Human Rights delivered its judgement in Drelon v. France. The case concerns Mr Drelon’s denied applications to donate blood because he refused to answer whether he had ever had sex with other men and therefore to disclose his alleged sexual orientation. […]

  • Marie-Hélène Peter-Spiess

A.L. v. France: Domestic Surrogacy, Genetic Fatherhood, and the Best Interests of the Child

February 10, 2023

By Marie-Hélène Peter-Spiess[1] In its recent judgment A.L. v. France, the European Court of Human Rights (the “ECtHR” or the “Court”) looked into the issue of domestic surrogacy and legal fatherhood in a situation where two paternal figures are on the line. More specifically, the case featured a surrogacy-born child that the surrogate entrusted to […]

  • Nikos Koumoutzis

D.B. and Others v. Switzerland: Tracing the Origins of the Right to Recognition of Same-Sex Parentage in International Surrogacy

December 23, 2022

by Nikos Koumoutzis Since 2014, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has been hearing cross-border surrogacy cases concerning the right to recognition of parentage of the child with its intended parents within the framework of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). A fairly large number of such cases have been reported already, and […]

  • Sarah Ganty

Surrogacy as citizenship deprivation in S.-H. v. Poland

March 14, 2022

By Sarah Ganty One might expect that with the emphasis placed on the best interests of the child in recent years (even decades), the issue of surrogacy would not be so haphazardly approached by the ECtHR. And yet the patchwork quilt of protection afforded to children (and their parents) born from surrogacy is strikingly insufficient, […]

  • Kyriaki Patsianta

X v. Poland: A victory, yet not a triumph for homosexual parents in Strasbourg

November 30, 2021

By Dr Kyriaki Patsianta In the case of X v. Poland, the ECtHR found that there had been a violation of articles 14 and 8 of the Convention in respect of a homosexual mother, who alleged that the removal of her youngest child from her custody, after her former husband obtained a change in the […]

  • Guest Blogger

Medical “normalisation” of intersex persons: third-party intervention to the ECtHR in the case of M. v. France

April 07, 2021

By Charly Derave, PhD Researcher at the Perelman Centre for legal philosophy (ULB), and Hania Ouhnaoui, coordinator of the Equality Law Clinic (ULB). On 24 February 2021, the Equality Law Clinic (ELC) of the Université Libre de Bruxelles[1] and the Human Rights Centre (HRC) of Ghent University[2] submitted a third-party intervention to the European Court […]

  • Guest Blogger

B. and C. v Switzerland: between concealment of sexual orientation and risk assessment in Article 3 cases

January 15, 2021

Blog post by Riccardo Viviani, LL.M., and Denise Venturi, Ph.D. Candidate in Law, KU Leuven, Research Unit Public Law* On 17 November 2020, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) delivered its judgment in B. and C. v Switzerland. The case concerned the risk of deportation and ill-treatment upon return to the Gambia of a […]

  • Guest Blogger

Honner v France: Damage Prevention and/or Damage Control?

January 12, 2021

By Alice Margaria (Senior Research Fellow, Department of ‘Law & Anthropology’, Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology) In 2020, an application concerning the parental rights of a co-mother was to be expected. What is surprising, however, is the ECtHR’s response. In Honner v France, the Court held that the refusal to grant contact rights to […]

  • Guest Blogger

The Challenges of Saying ‘I do’ for same-sex couples: The Human Rights Centre submits a Third Party Intervention in transnational same-sex marriage case

November 20, 2020

By Claire Poppelwell-Scevak (PhD Researcher at the Human Rights Centre, Ghent University) and Sarah Den Haese (PhD Researcher at the Human Rights Centre, Ghent University) The Human Rights Centre of Ghent University[1] (Belgium) recently submitted a third party intervention (TPI) before the European Court of Human Rights in the communicated case of Szypuła v. Poland and […]

  • Guest Blogger

A picture of a same-sex kiss on Facebook wreaks havoc: Beizaras and Levickas v. Lithuania

February 07, 2020

Ingrida Milkaite is a PhD researcher in the research group Law & Technology at Ghent University, Belgium. She is working on the research project ‘A children’s rights perspective on privacy and data protection in the digital age’ (Ghent University, Special Research Fund) and is a member of the Human Rights Centre at the Faculty of Law and […]

  • Laurens Lavrysen

Zhdanov and others v. Russia: on missed opportunities and an offensive applicant

August 29, 2019

On 16 July, the Court delivered its judgment in the case of Zhdanov and others v. Russia. The case concerns the refusal by the Russian authorities to register two LGBT rights organisations because they were considered extremist organisations on account of the allegedly immoral character of their activities. In this judgment, the Court found a […]

  • Guest Blogger

X v. FYROM: A circumspect compromise on trans* rights?

April 02, 2019

This post was written by Mariam Gaiparashvili and Sarah Schoentjes, Master students at the Human Rights Legal Clinic, Ghent University In X v. FYROM, the ECtHR confirmed the Member States’ positive obligation under Article 8 ECHR to establish a clear legal procedure for gender recognition. Disappointingly, however, it refused to examine the applicant’s claim that […]

  • Guest Blogger

S.V. v. Italy: on temporality and transgender persons

October 19, 2018

By Pieter Cannoot, PhD Researcher at the Human Rights Centre of Ghent University On 11 October 2018, the European Court of Human Rights found a violation of Article 8 ECHR in a case involving a transsexual woman called S.V. The application concerned the Italian authorities’ refusal to authorise S.V. officially changing her first name on […]

  • Laurens Lavrysen

Human Rights Centre submits a third party intervention in “Conchita Wurst case”

August 03, 2018

The Human Rights Centre of Ghent University[1] has recently submitted a third party intervention in the case of Minasyan and Others v. Armenia, which raises important issues concerning the protection of LGBTIQ+ persons against hate speech. In our third party intervention, we invite the Court to clarify Convention standards regarding the positive obligation for the […]

  • Guest Blogger

The CJEU’s judgment in Coman: a small step for the recognition of same-sex couples underlying European divides over LGBT rights

July 24, 2018

By Manon Beury, research assistant in Comparative Sexual Orientation Law, Leiden University Following the eagerly-awaited judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Coman and Others v. Romania, the Romanian Constitutional Court decided on 18 July 2018 that same-sex married couples have the right to reside in the country if one […]

1 2