Strasbourg Observers

View posts from: LGBT Rights

  • 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 […]

  • Guest Blogger

Inadmissibility decision in Bonnaud and Lecoq v. France – should the Court have recognized the specificity of a same-sex relationship?

April 11, 2018

By Pieter Cannoot, PhD researcher at the Human Rights Centre of Ghent University On 6 February 2018, the European Court of Human Rights declared the application of Francine Bonnaud and Patricia Lecoq, two French women who were in a relationship at the time of the relevant facts, manifestly ill-founded. The application concerned the refusal by […]

  • Guest Blogger

The EU Court in Luxembourg is raising the bar on LGBT rights

February 23, 2018

By Sam MacMahon Baldwin, Attorney-at-law (Advokat) at Gorrissen Federspiel 2017 ended with the Strasbourg Court reaffirming the decision from Orlandi and Others v. Italy that Member States must recognize and protect same-sex unions – although the Court did not require recognition of actual same-sex marriage. Now well into the new year, it is the EU […]

  • Claire Poppelwell-Scevak

Oliari, Orlandi and Homophobic Dissenting Opinions: The Strasbourg Approach to the recognition of same-sex marriages

February 02, 2018

By Claire Poppelwell-Scevak, PhD FWO Fellow, Gent University From first glance, the decision of Orlandi and Others v Italy on 14 December 2017, may appear as a step in the direction of same-sex couples being afforded the protection of Article 12 ECHR – the right to marry. However, when one digs a little deeper into […]

  • Claire Poppelwell-Scevak

Same Same But Different: A heterosexual couple denied registered partnership by the ECtHR

December 05, 2017

By Claire Poppelwell-Scevak, FWO Research Fellow, Human Rights Centre (Ghent University) On 26 October 2017 the European Court of Human Rights held in Ratzenböck and Seydl v Austria that Austria’s registered partnership law, which is only open to homosexual couples, did not violate the European Convention on Human Rights by denying this registered partnership to […]

  • Laurens Lavrysen

Bayev and Others v. Russia: on Judge Dedov’s outrageously homophobic dissent

July 13, 2017

Earlier this week, we published a blog post by Pieter Cannoot and Claire Poppelwell-Scevak on the judgment of Bayev and Others v. Russia in which the Court held that Russia’s so-called gay propaganda law violated the European Convention. In this blog post, I will not further dwell upon the outcome of the case or the […]

  • Guest Blogger

ECtHR finds Russia’s gay propaganda law discriminatory in strong-worded judgment

July 11, 2017

By Pieter Cannoot, PhD researcher, Human Rights Centre (Ghent University) and Claire Poppelwell-Scevak, FWO Research Fellow, Human Rights Centre (Ghent University) On 20 June 2017, the European Court of Human Rights issued a particularly strong-worded judgment in the case of Bayev and Others v. Russia. The Court not only found Russia’s legislative prohibition of the […]

  • Guest Blogger

A.P., Garçon and Nicot v. France: the Court draws a line for trans rights

May 05, 2017

By Pieter Cannoot, PhD researcher of human rights law (Ghent University) On 6 April 2017, the European Court of Human Rights significantly strengthened the human rights protection of trans persons, with its long-awaited judgment in the case A.P., Garçon and Nicot v. France. The Court ruled that the condition of compulsory sterilizing surgery or treatment […]

  • Guest Blogger

The potential of a vulnerability-based approach: some additional reflections following O.M. v Hungary

October 25, 2016

Guest post by Denise Venturi, PhD Student in International Law, Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna (Italy) and KU Leuven (Belgium) As has recently been noted in this blog, the case of O.M. v Hungary adds another tile to the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR) mosaic on vulnerability. The present blog post seeks to start from these […]

  • Guest Blogger

Taddeucci and McCall v. Italy: welcome novelty in the ECtHR’s case-law on equal treatment of same-sex couples

July 27, 2016

This guest post was written by Dr. Nelleke Koffeman (*) The Taddeucci and McCall v. Italy judgment of 30 June 2016 is a novelty in the ECtHR’s case-law on equal treatment of same-sex couples. It is the first time that the Court, in finding a violation of the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of sexual […]

  • Guest Blogger

Oliari and Others v. Italy: a stepping stone towards full legal recognition of same-sex relationships in Europe

September 16, 2015

This guest post was written by Giuseppe Zago, Researcher of Comparative Sexual Orientation Law, Leiden University (*) Last 21 July, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Oliari and others v. Italy had once again the opportunity to analyze the status of same-sex couples wishing to marry or enter into a legally recognized partnership. […]

  • Guest Blogger

The Y.Y. v. Turkey case and trans individuals’ gender recognition

April 24, 2015

This guest post was written by Ivana Isailovic, post-doc researcher at the Perelman Center (Université libre de Bruxelles) and affiliated to the IAP, Human Rights Integration project.[1] The Y.Y v. Turkey decision deals with the process of gender recognition, which is one of the many pressing legal issues trans[2] communities are struggling with in Europe. […]

  • Guest Blogger

Vallianatos and Others v. Greece: What is in there for Lithuania?

January 13, 2014

This guest post was written by Natalija Bitiukova* Is it possible that having a discriminatory law allowing civil partnerships only for different-sex couples is better than having no law at all? After the Grand Chamber released its judgment in Vallianatos and Others v. Greece case, Lithuanian human rights advocates have realized that indeed it is. […]

  • Weichie

X. v. Turkey: Why a Ruling on the Basis of Discriminatory Effects Would Have Been Preferable

October 25, 2012

A few weeks ago, the European Court of Human Rights released its judgment in X. v. Turkey. The case concerned a homosexual detainee who was put in an individual cell and under a very restrictive detention regime, after he complained about intimidation and harassment by heterosexual detainees with whom he shared a collective cell. On […]

  • Alexandra Timmer

Anti-Gay Hate Speech: Vejdeland and Others v. Sweden

February 14, 2012

The Court has handed down a fascinating judgment on the freedom of expression. Vejdeland and others v. Sweden is the first time that the Court applies the principles relating to hate speech in the context of sexual orientation. A unanimous Court has ruled that Sweden did not violate the right to freedom of expression: the […]

  • Weichie

Blood Donations and the Permanent Exclusion of “Men Who Have Sex with Men”

September 20, 2011

In Belgium, as in many other European countries, homosexual men are not allowed to donate blood. To be more precise, not homosexual men are permanently excluded from donating blood, but “men who have sex with men”. “What’s in a name?”, you might ask. That is what I intend to find out in this post. Reasonable […]

  • Alexandra Timmer

2010: year of “profound moral views”?

January 20, 2011

2010 was a turbulent year for the European Court of Human Rights. The Court has been under fire both for usurping too much power and for achieving too little. The first type of critique is made by conservatives who recycle the old idea that an international court has no legitimacy to judge the situation on […]

1 2 3