Fallo de la corte europea

lTribunal: Corte Europea de Derechos Humanos(CorteEuropeadeDerechosHumanos)
Fecha: 24/06/2010
Partes: Schalk and Kopf c. Austria
Publicado en: LA LEY 06/07/2010 c
Cita Online: AR/JUR/27332/2010

Texto Completo: FIRST SECTION CASE OF SCHALK AND KOPF v. AUSTRIA
(Application no. 30141/04) JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG, 24 June 2010
This judgment will become final in the circumstances set outin Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Schalk and Kopf v. Austria,
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section) , sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Christos Rozakis, President,
Anatoly Kovler,
Elisabeth Steiner, Dean Spielmann,
Sverre Erik Jebens,
Giorgio Malinverni,
George Nicolaou, judges,
and André Wampach,Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 25 February 2010 and on 3 June 2010,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on the last-mentioned date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in an application (no. 30141/04) against the Republic of Austria lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and FundamentalFreedoms (“ the Convention” ) by two Austrian nationals, Mr Horst Michael Schalk and Mr Johan Franz Kopf (“ the applicants” ) , on 5 August 2004.
2. The applicants were represented by Mr K. Mayer, a lawyer practising in Vienna. The Austrian Government (“ the Government” ) were represented by their Agent, Ambassador H. Tichy, Head of the International Law Department at the Federal Ministry forEuropean and International Affairs.
3. The applicants alleged in particular, that they were discriminated against as, being a same-sex couple, they were denied the possibility to marry or to have their relationship otherwise recognised by law.
4. On 8 January 2007 the President of the First Section decided to give notice of the application to the Government. It was also decided to examine themerits of the application at the same time as its admissibility (Article 29 § 3).
5. The applicant and the Government each filed written observations on the admissibility and merits of the application. The Government also filed further written observations. In addition, third-party comments were received from the United Kingdom Government, who had been given leave by the President to intervene inthe written procedure (Article 36 § 2 of the Convention and Rule 44 § 2).A joint third-party comment was received from four non-governmental organisations which had been given leave by the President to intervene, namely FIDH (Fédération Internationale des ligues des Droits de l’ Homme) , ICJ (International Commission of Jurists) AIRE Centre (Advice on Individual Rights in Europe) and ILGA-Europe(European Region of the International Lesbian and Gay Association).The four non-governmental organisations were also given leave by the President to intervene at the hearing.
6. A hearing took place in public in the Human Rights Building, Strasbourg, on 25 February 2010 (Rule 59 § 3).
There appeared before the Court:
(a) for the Government
Mrs B. Ohms, Federal Chancellory, Deputy Agent,Mrs G. PASCHINGER, Federal Ministry of European and International Affairs
Mr M. Stormann, Federal Ministry of Justice, Advisers;
(b) for the applicants
Mr K. Mayer,Counsel,
Mr H. Schalk,Applicant;
(c) for the Non-governmental organisations, third-party interveners
Mr R. Wintemute, Kings College, London Counsel,
Mrs A. Jernow, International Commission of Jurists, Adviser.The Court heard addresses by Mrs Ohms, Mr Mayer and Mr Wintemute.
THE FACTS
I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE
7. The applicants were born in 1962 and 1960, respectively. They are a same-sex couple living in Vienna.
8. On 10 September 2002 the applicants requested the Office for matters of Personal Status (Standesamt) to proceed with the formalities to enable them to contract marriage....