CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 20 novembre 2023

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 11 December 2023   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 78879/16 Kristina Vladyslavna MUSIICHENKO against Ukraine lodged on 5 December 2016 communicated on 20 November 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the Ukrainian authorities’ refusal to correct the spelling of the applicant’s first and patronymic names in the civil status register. Throughout her life, the applicant, who is a Ukrainian citizen, bore the first name Kristina and the patronymic Vladyslavna, which were spelled Крістіна Владиславна in her official documentation, including passports issued in 1996 and 2015. According to her, this spelling corresponded to the Ukrainian transliteration of the respective names as they sound in Russian. In 2015, at the age of 45, she discovered that her first name and patronymic in the civil status register had been adapted to their Ukrainian etymological versions and entered in 2009 into the recently launched electronic civil status register in accordance with the rules of Ukrainian orthography as Христина Владиславівна (Khrystyna Vladyslavivna). Relying on her right to a name, the applicant instituted judicial proceedings seeking the correction of the said information, but on 19 February 2016 the Kyiv Circuit Administrative Court rejected her claim. On 25 May 2016 the Kyiv Appeal Administrative Court upheld the judgment of the lower court. The appeal court examined the merits of the applicant’s claim and considered that the names were spelled in the civil status register in accordance with the rules of Ukrainian orthography. It also noted that the applicant should have availed herself of the available procedure for the change of a name but failed to do so. On 13   June   2016 the Higher Administrative Court of Ukraine rejected the applicant’s appeal on points of law as unsubstantiated. The applicant complains that the refusal to correct the spelling of her names in the civil status register amounted to a violation of her right to respect for private life, which is guaranteed by Article 8 of the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has the applicant exhausted all effective domestic remedies, as required by Article   35   §   1 of the Convention (compare with Bulgakov v.   Ukraine , no. 59894/00, §§ 52-54, 11 September 2007)?   2.     Assuming that domestic remedies have been exhausted, has there been an interference with the applicant’s right to respect for her private life, within the meaning of Article   8 §   1 of the Convention? If so, was that interference in accordance with the law and necessary in terms of Article   8 §   2 (see, mutatis   mutandis , Güzel   Erdagöz v.   Turkey , no.   37483/02, §§   52-55, 21   October   2008; Aktaş   and   Aslaniskender v.   Turkey , nos.   18684/07 and 21101/07, §§   47-49, 25   June   2019; Daróczy v.   Hungary , no.   44378/05, §§   28 ‑ 34, 1 July 2008; Künsberg Sarre v. Austria , nos. 19475/20 and 3 others, §§ 67-74, 17 January 2023)?   The Government are specifically invited to comment on the discrepancy observed in the spelling of the applicant’s first and patronymic names in Ukrainian as they appear in her official documents (including passports) compared to the civil status register.