Case Law- family law Flashcards

1
Q

Goodwin V. UK

A

-Christine goodwin was a transgender woman from the UK and suffered from discrimination and lack of legal recognition and claimed a breach of art. 8, 12 and 14 of ECHR.
-the Court ruled that that the UK’s failure to recognize gender reassignment violated Articles 8 (private life) and 12 (marriage).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Markx V. Belgium

A

-Under Belgian law, no legal bond between a non married mother and her child results from the mere fact of birth.
-Court ruled that: there was a breach of art 8 and 14.
-Article 8 makes no distinction between the legitimate and illegitimate family. -Article 8 does not merely compel the State to abstain from such interference :inaddition there may be positive obligations.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Johnston V. Ireland

A

-The ECtHR confirmed that the right to marry under Article 12 does not include a right to divorce. The Court ruled that Ireland was not obligated to introduce divorce under the Convention.
-ARTICLE 12 (MARRIAGE) GIVES NO RIGHT TO MARRIAGE.
-However, it found that the lack of legal recognition of a child’s natural family ties (where parents were unable to marry) violated Article 8, which protects the right to respect for family life.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Schalk and Kopf v. Austria

A

-Court ruled that the fact that Austria did not allow for same-sex marriage is not a breach of Art. 8, Art. 12 and Art. 14.
-countries have a wide margin of appreciation in deciding to allow same-sex marriage.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Gaskin V. UK

A

The case established several key principles regarding access to personal records:
-Right to Personal Information under Article 8–Public authorities must provide access to personal records when they are essential to a person’s identity and private life.
-If a refusal occurs, an** independent review mechanism **must be available.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Odrieve V. France

A

Odrieve was a foundling who wanted to know her biological mother, but was not able to, claiming a breach of Art. 8 and 14.
-The ECtHR ruled in favour of France and found a fair balance between the mother’s right to privacy and the child’s right to know their origins
-French law aimed to protect both parties rights and did not violate the Convention.
-odrieve was in the end allowed to know who her siblings were.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly