CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 29 mai 2015

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s97EB40D9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law 186 June 2015 Hörmann and Moser v. Austria (communicated case) - 31176/13   Article 14 Discrimination Conclusion of registered partnership and civil marriage before different authorities: communicated [This summary also covers the communicated case of Dietz and Suttasom v. Austria , 31185/13] The applicants, two homosexual couples, applied to the Office for Matters of Personal Status to contract a civil marriage, adding that if they were not permitted to marry, they wished to apply for a registered partnership, but only if it was concluded before the Office for Matters of Personal Status. Their application for the conclusion of a civil marriage was dismissed as, under the Civil Code, civil marriage could only be concluded by two persons of the opposite sex. The Office for Matters of Personal Status also dismissed their application for a registered partnership as such a partnership could only be concluded before the District Administrative Authority. The applicants unsuccessfully appealed against that decision before the administrative authorities and the domestic courts. The applicants complain under Article   14 read in conjunction with Article 8 of the Convention that they were discriminated against on grounds of their sexual orientation, because registered partnerships (which are open exclusively to same-sex couples) are concluded before the District Administrative Authorities, while civil marriage (which can only be concluded by two persons of the opposite sex) is contracted before the Office for Matters of Personal Status. Communicated under Article 14 read in conjunction with Article   8.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes