K.H. and Others v. Slovakia, ECtHR, 32881/04, 28/04/2009
 | 
2009

Former patients prevented from photocopying their medical records - Applicants’ inability to effectively present their case due to authorities’ refusal to grant them access to decisive evidence - Violation of Article 8 (Respect for family life/Respect for private life) and 6 (Access to court)

Dissenting / Concurring: Ján Šikuta

Zaunegger v. Germany, ECtHR, 22028/04, 03/12/2009
 | 
2009

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

E.B. v. France, ECtHR, 43546/02, 22/1/2008 [GC]
 | 
2008

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 orien

Dissenting / Concurring: Jean-Paul Costa, Riza Türmen, Mindia Ugrekhelidze, Danutė Jočienė, Boštjan Zupančič, Loukis Loucaides, Antonella Mularoni / Peer Lorenzen, Sverre Erik Jebens

Moretti and Benedetti v. Italy, ECtHR, 16318/07, 27/04/2010
 | 
2008

Failure to examine request for adoption by foster parents before declaring child free for adoption - Violation of Article 8 (Positive obligations/Respect for family life)

Palau-Martinez v. France, ECtHR, 64927/01, 16/12/2003
 | 
2003

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