Judicial rectification of assigned gender – Possibility subject to modifications to the sex characteristics of the interested party – The modification of primary sexual characteristics through surgery is necessary
Violation of Article 8 (Respect for family life and private life) - Revocation of adoption while criminal proceedings for suspected child abuse were still pending - Failure adequately to investigate unauthorised disclosure of confidential information or to protect reputation and right to be presumed innocent of parent suspected of child abuse
The applicant had her pregnancy terminated due to the fetus being diagnosed with hydrocephalus - Following complications from the treatment to induce abortion, her doctor had to remove her uterus and ovaries to save her life, leaving her permanently unable to bear children - The Court concluded that the applicant's right to private life was infringed by not involving her in the choice of medical treatment or informing her of the risks, and the State failed to provide a system for redress, thus violating Article 8
Impossibility of second-parent adoption in a same-sex couple - Government's failure to provide convincing reasons for the exclusion second-parent adoption in a same-sex couple, while allowing that possibility in an unmarried different-sex couple, deemed necessary for the protection of the family in the traditional sense or for the protection of the interests of the child, amounts to discrimination
Dissenting / Concurring: Josep Casadevall, Ineta Ziemele, Anatoly Kovler, Danutė Jočienė, Ján Šikuta, Vincent A. De Gaetano, Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos / Dean Spielmann
Abortion and Voluntary Termination of Pregnancy – Minor pregnant women – Request for termination of pregnancy in the first ninety days
Prohibition of In Vitro Fertilisation violates the right to privacy and family life, personal liberty and integrity, and to non-discrimination
Dissenting / Concurring: García-Sayán, Vio Grossi
Mother in a same-sex relationship denied custody of her children – Violation of the right to privacy under Article 11(2) of the American Convention – The right to privacy includes the protection of intimate relationships
Dissenting / Concurring: Pérez Pérez
Violation of Article 3 (treatment and investigation) and Article 8 - The case concerned three women of Roma origin who complained in particular that they had been sterilised without their full and informed consent, that the authorities’ ensuing investigation into their sterilisation had not been thorough, fair or effective and that their ethnic origin had played a decisive role in their sterilisation
The applicant claimed she suffered inhumane and degrading treatment, negative impacts on her private and family life, and discrimination based on sex and ethnic origin due to the lack of effective anti-discrimination laws in Slovakia at the time of her sterilization - The Court held that the applicant's rights under Article 3 were violated, and that the State's failure to provide sufficient legal protections for the reproductive health of Roma women violated Article 8.
Violation of Article 8 (Disclosure of information by public hospital about a pregnant minor who was seeking an abortion after being raped; Medical authorities’ failure to provide timely and unhindered access to lawful abortion to a minor who had become pregnant as a result of rape) - Violation of Article 5 (Placement of pregnant minor in juvenile shelter to prevent her from seeking abortion following rape) - Violation of Article 3 (Harassment of minor by anti-abortion activists as a result of authorities’ actions after she had sought an abortion following rape)
Dissenting / Concurring: Vincent A. De Gaetano
The allegation of a Slovak woman of Roma ethnic origin that she had
been the victim of forced sterilisation - A violation of Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) - A violation of Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life)
Dissenting / Concurring: Ljiljana Mijović
Violation of Article 14 (discrimination) - Inability of father of a child born out of wedlock to obtain joint custody without the mother’s consent - The applicant had been treated differently from mothers or from married or divorced fathers in that he had required his former partner's consent to joint custody
Dissenting / Concurring: Bertram Schmitt
Refusal to grant approval for the purposes of adoption, on the ground of the applicant’s lifestyle as a lesbian living with another woman - The Court considered that the reference to the applicant's homosexuality had been, if not explicit, at least implicit, and that the influence of the applicant’s avowed homosexuality on the assessment of her application had been established and, having regard to the foregoing, had been a decisive factor in the decision to refuse her authorisation to adopt - The domestic authorities had made a distinction based on considerations regarding her sexual orientation, a distinction that was unacceptable under the Convention
Dissenting / Concurring: Jean-Paul Costa, Riza Türmen, Mindia Ugrekhelidze, Danutė Jočienė, Boštjan Zupančič, Loukis Loucaides, Antonella Mularoni / Peer Lorenzen, Sverre Erik Jebens
Violation of Article 14 (discrimination) - Placement of children with father, as the mother was a Jehovah’s Witness - The appeal court had treated the parents differently on the basis of the applicant’s religion, on the strength of a harsh analysis of the educational principles allegedly imposed by the religion
Dissenting / Concurring: W. Thomassen
The case concerned the couple’s complaint that they had not been able to recover embryos that had been seized by the prosecuting authorities in 2009 and that they had been prevented from having another child - Violation of Article 8 (preventing the applicants from retrieving their embryos as ordered by the High Court of Cassation constituted an interference with their right to respect for their private life)