Article 8 - Non-recognition of parental link with non-biological child born abroad via surrogacy, while preserving bond through foster care: “family life” applicable

The applicants, a married couple and their daughter born in Ukraine via gestational surrogacy, faced a refusal by the French Court of Appeal in 2017 to fully register the Ukrainian birth certificate, listing only the legal father-child relationship - The Court held that the intended mother could establish a legal relationship through adoption, not directly through the foreign birth certificate, in accordance with French law which does not permit gestational surrogacy - The Court found this approach did not violate the child's rights, as the adoption process provided an effective mechanism f

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) 

Ban on adoption of Russian children by US nationals - Violation of Article 14

Inability under Turkish law for adoptive mother to have her forename recorded on child’s identity papers in place of the biological mother’s forename - Violation of Article 8 (Positive obligations)

Refusal to grant legal recognition in France to parent-child relationships that had been legally established in the United States between children born as a result of surrogacy arrangement and the couples who had had recourse to such arrangements - Violation of Article 8 (Respect for private life)

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

Continuing failure to provide information concerning fate of newborn baby in hospital care - Violation of Article 8 (Positive obligations/Respect for family life)

Sterilisation without permission and the low amount of compensation - Violation of Article 8

Refusal of simple adoption order in favour of homosexual partner of biological mother - No violation of Article 14

Refusal of permission to adopt owing to prohibition of adoption in child’s country of birth - No violation of Article 8

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

Obstructive behaviour of local authorities in not returning embryos seized pursuant to investigation subsequently acknowledged by domestic court - No violation

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)

Ban preventing healthy carriers of cystic fibrosis from screening embryos for in vitro fertilisation, despite existence of right to therapeutic abortion in domestic law - Violation of Article 8 (Respect for private life)

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)

The complaint by three women that the restrictions on abortion in Ireland stigmatised and humiliated them, risked damaging their health, and, in the third applicant’s case, even her life - violation of Article 8 (right to private and family life) in respect of the third applicant