CEDHPRESS;HEARINGS;ENG
CEDH · PRESS;HEARINGS;ENG — 25 février 2010
- ECLI
- ECLI:CEDH:003-3021068-3333405
- Date
- 25 février 2010
- Publication
- 25 février 2010
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulAnalyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA678F94A { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right; font-size:11pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sA101A847 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s92A5AB2 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4BAE41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt } .s906CA806 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:11pt } .s99A63BFE { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; font-size:11pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s8A3CF084 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:85.05pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-85.05pt; font-size:11pt } .s7E1107BE { width:4.15pt; display:inline-block } .s23A41E03 { width:36pt; display:inline-block } .s70293CC2 { width:6.79pt; display:inline-block } .sAA7F7567 { width:12.71pt; display:inline-block } .s5B1C538B { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:144pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-144pt; text-align:left; font-size:11pt } .s37C58709 { width:21.13pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s11AD46B1 { font-family:Arial; font-size:7.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 }   154 25.02.2010   Press release issued by the Registrar   CHAMBER HEARING SCHALK AND KOPF v. AUSTRIA   The European Court of Human Rights is holding a Chamber hearing today Thursday   25   February 2010 at 9 a.m. , on the admissibility and merits in the case of Schalk   and Kopf v. Austria (application no. 30141/04).   The hearing will be broadcast from 2.30 p.m. on the Court’s Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).   The applicants, Horst Michael Schalk and Johann Franz Kopf, are Austrian nationals who were born in 1962 and 1960 respectively and live in Vienna. They are a same-sex couple and live together.   In September 2002 the applicants asked the competent authorities to allow them to contract marriage. Their request was refused by the Vienna Municipal Office on the grounds that marriage could only be contracted between two persons of opposite sex. The applicants appealed before the Vienna Regional Governor and the Constitutional Court arguing that the notion of marriage had evolved over time thus having to be understood nowadays as a permanent union encompassing all aspects of life, and that the procreation and education of children were no longer a determinative factor in it. Their appeals were not successful. Both the Governor and the Constitutional Court, referring to Article 12 (right to marry) of the European Convention on Human Rights and also to Articles 8 (right to respect for private and family life) and 14 (prohibition of discrimination), held that to limit the notion of marriage to the traditional concept of marriage reserved to persons of a different sex was objectively justified.   Relying on Article 12, they complain of the authorities’ refusal to allow them to contract marriage. Relying further on Article 14 in conjunction with Article 8 they complain that they were discriminated against on account of their sexual orientation since they were denied the right to marry and have no other possibility to have their relationship recognised by law. Finally, under Article 1 of Protocol 1 (protection of property), they allege that they suffer financial disadvantages compared to married couples.   The application was lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 5   August 2004.   The case will be heard by a Chamber composed as follows:   Christos Rozakis (Greece), President , Anatoly Kovler (Russia), Elisabeth Steiner (Austria), Dean Spielmann (Luxembourg), Sverre Erik Jebens (Norway), Giorgio Malinverni (Switzerland), George Nicolaou (Cyprus), judges , Nina Vajić (Croatia), Khanlar Hajiyev (Azerbaijan), substitute judges , and also Søren Nielsen, Section Registrar .   Representatives of the parties   Government :       Brigitte Ohms , Agent , Gerlinde Paschinger and Michael   Stormann , Advisers ;   Applicants :       Horst Schalk , applicant,         and Klemens Mayer , Counsel ;   Third party interveners :   AIRE, FIDH, ILGA-Europe and ICJ, NGOs, Robert Wintemute, Counsel, and Allison Jernow , Adviser.   ***   After the hearing the Court will begin its deliberations, which are held in private. A decision on admissibility, followed if appropriate by a judgment, will be delivered at a later date. [1]   Press contacts Stefano Piedimonte (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 04) Tracey Turner-Tretz (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 30) Kristina Pencheva-Malinowski (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 70) Céline Menu-Lange (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 58 77) Frédéric Dolt (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 53 39) Nina Salomon (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 49 79)   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.   [1] This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- PRESS;HEARINGS;ENG
- Date
- 25 février 2010
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CEDH:003-3021068-3333405
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral
- Résumé officiel