We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
from Part II - Parenthood and Children's Rights
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 September 2018
EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS ’ GROUND RULES ‘
SAME-SEX COUPLES: AN OBLIGATION TO LEGALLY RECOGNISE UNION, BUT NO OBLIGATION TO GRANT ACCESS TO MARRIAGE
European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) jurisprudence provides several EU-wide ‘ground rules’ for variable levels of parenting rights for same-sex couples across the EU. However, in 2010, the Court drew a line in the sand in the case of Schalk and Kopf v. Austria in finding that there was no obligation for a Member State to grant same-sex couples access to marriage. The Court has reiterated this position on two occasions since: in Gas and Dubois v. France, and in X v. Austria. This baseline has now been entrenched: there appears to be no suggestion on the horizon of the ECtHR imposing a positive obligation on Member States to recognise same-sex marriage.
By contrast the horizon for same-sex parenthood outside marriage is brighter. In Vallianatos and others v. Greece, in the absence of any domestic recognition of same-sex union, Greece had taken the unusual step of creating a civil partnership scheme, but reserving it to heterosexual couples only. The Court found the measure to be directly discriminatory and a violation of Articles 8 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), although at that stage did not suggest a positive obligation to provide for domestic legal recognition of same-sex union. However, in 2015, the court went a step further and put down another marker in Oliari and others v. Italy. The Court found that the absence of any legal framework or regime providing for the recognition and protection of same-sex unions is a breach of Articles 8 and 14.
The current position is thus that there is no obligation on Member States to grant same-sex couples access to marriage, but there is an obligation to implement some framework for the recognition of same-sex union.
DIRECT DISCRIMINATION UNACCEPTABLE, BUT NO OBLIGATION TO PROTECT AGAINST INDIRECT DISCRIMINATORY OUTCOME
In Gas and Dubois v. France, the Court found that a regime that reserved parenting rights to married couples was not a breach of Articles 8 and 14 ECHR, despite the fact that this had an indirectly discriminatory effect on same-sex couples, who at the time had no access to marriage rights.
To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.
