CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 4 août 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sADDDE81A { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s79B8843C { margin-top:60pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s525DD195 { width:65.56%; border-collapse:collapse } .s407FDF4B { width:14.6%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sAE7FCEFB { width:42.3%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sF02C27D { width:43.1%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sA32E384D { width:14.6%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sBF02554 { width:42.3%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sEEAA4710 { width:43.1%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } Published on 25 August 2025   SECOND SECTION Application no. 30821/23 L.K. and Others against Hungary lodged on 27 July 2023 communicated on 4 August 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The case concerns the applicants’ complaint about the impossibility to change their gender markers and their names accordingly. The list of applicants is set out in the Appendix. On 19 May 2020 the Hungarian Parliament adopted amendments to Act   no. I of 2010 on the Civil Registration Procedure (hereinafter: “the 2020 amendments”). As a result, section 69/B(1)(b)(be) of the Civil Registration Procedure Act provides that the register of personal identification data shall contain the “sex at birth” of the person concerned which data may not be changed in accordance with section 69/B(3). “Sex at birth” is defined in section 3 (x) of the same Act as “biological sex assigned on the basis of primary sexual characteristics and chromosomes”. The amendments have been in force since 29 May 2020. On 23 December 2020 amendments to the Hungarian Fundamental Law came into force providing, among other things, for the protection, under Article XVI(1), of the “right of children to a self-identity corresponding to their sex at birth”. According to the explanations to the bill, “sex at birth is an endowment that cannot be changed: people are born male or female”. In its decision no. 3058/2023. (II. 16.) the Constitutional Court found that the impugned provisions of the 2020 amendments were not in breach of the right to human dignity or the right to respect for private life and accordingly dismissed a judicial motion of the Budapest High Court on this issue. In the meantime, four petitioners filed constitutional complaints with the Constitutional Court arguing that the 2020 amendments ran counter, among other things, to their right to respect for their personal sphere and their human dignity. In its decision no.   3235/2023. (VI. 2.), the Constitutional Court rejected those complaints without any examination of their merits holding that the petitioners had not availed themselves of judicial remedies before filing their complaints. Relying on Article 8 of the Convention, the applicants complain that they wish to change their gender markers and names in the register of personal identification data in accordance with their gender identity, but they have had no legal avenue at their disposal to do so following the entry into force of the 2020 amendments. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Have the applicants had any effective domestic remedy at their disposal so as to have their gender marker and name changed after 29   May 2020? If so, have the applicants exhausted all effective domestic remedies, as required by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention?   2.     Has there been a violation of the applicants’ right to respect for their private life, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention, in view of the express legislative ban enacted in 2020 on the change of gender markers (see Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 28957/95, §§ 71-93, ECHR   2002 ‑ VI, Grant v. the United Kingdom , no. 32570/03, §§ 39-44, ECHR 2006-VII, X and Y v. Romania , nos. 2145/16 and 20607/16, §§   150 ‑ 68, 19 January 2021)?       APPENDIX Application no. 30821/23   No. Applicant’s Name Nationality 1. L.K. Hungarian 2. A.A. Hungarian 3. H.A.B.H. Hungarian 4. N.B. Hungarian 5. L.B. Hungarian 6. P.L.C. Hungarian 7. B.C. Hungarian 8. Z.D. Hungarian 9. F.D. Hungarian 10. G.D. Hungarian 11. L.E. Hungarian 12. E.R.E. Hungarian 13. B.F.F. Hungarian 14. M.F. Hungarian 15. L.F. Hungarian 16. D.E.G. Hungarian 17. K.G. Hungarian 18. S.A.C.H. Hungarian 19. A.H. Hungarian 20. O.H. Hungarian 21. Z.J. Hungarian 22. K.K. Hungarian 23. L.U.K. Hungarian 24. L.I.K. Hungarian 25. N.K. Hungarian 26. V.E.K. Hungarian 27. B.A.K. Hungarian 28. A.K. Hungarian 29. B.L. Hungarian 30. K.L.O. Hungarian 31. B.L.M. Hungarian 32. A.N. Hungarian 33. K.O. Hungarian 34. A.E.P. Hungarian 35. P.P. Hungarian 36. E.P. Hungarian 37. D.P. Hungarian 38. S.P. Hungarian 39. L.P. Hungarian 40. M.P. Hungarian 41. T.R. Hungarian 42. B.R. Hungarian 43. A.R. Hungarian 44. K.V.T. Hungarian 45. A.T. Hungarian 46. B.T. Hungarian 47. H.T. Hungarian 48. S.B.T. Hungarian 49. N.T. Hungarian 50. A.U. Hungarian 51. F.I.V. Hungarian 52. M.V. Hungarian 53. F.A.V. Hungarian 54. R.M.W. Hungarian