Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-26T08:45:47.472Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Strasbourg, Russia and the Right to Same-Sex Marriage

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2023

Frank Cranmer
Frank Cranmer*
Affiliation:
Fellow, St Chad's College, Durham Honorary Research Fellow, Centre for Law and Religion, Cardiff University
*
frank.cranmer@centrallobby.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The issue of lack of legal recognition for same-sex partnerships has come before the European Court of Human Rights yet again, but this time before the Grand Chamber.

Keywords

Article 8 of the European Convention on Human RightsFedotovaright to same-sex marriageRussia
Type
Comment
Information
Ecclesiastical Law Journal , Volume 25 , Issue 2 , May 2023 , pp. 241 - 246
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Ecclesiastical Law Society 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 An earlier version of this Comment appeared on the Law & Religion UK blog on 30 January 2023. I should like to thank Professor Russell Sandberg for his comments, helpful as always, on this article in draft.

2 Fedotova and Others v Russia [2023] ECHR 55 at para 82.

3 Fedotova and Others v Russia [2021] ECHR 636.

4 Fedotova and Others v Russia [2023] ECHR 55 at para 103.

5 Ibid at para 48.

6 Ibid.

7 Ibid at para 111.

8 Oliari and Others v Italy [2015] ECHR 716.

9 Fedotova and Others v Russia [2023] ECHR 55 at para 118.

10 Orlandi and Others v Italy [2017] ECHR 1153.

11 Fedotova and Others v Russia [2023] ECHR 55 at paras 164–165.

12 Ibid at para 178.

13 Ibid at para 187.

14 Ibid at para 188.

15 Ibid at para 189.

16 Ibid at para 194.

17 Ibid at para 195.

18 Ibid at para 212.

19 Ibid at para 224.

20 The Russian Federation ceased to be a member of the Council of Europe as from 16 March 2022. The court, sitting in plenary session on 21 and 22 March 2022 in accordance with Rule 20 §1 of the Rules of Court, declared that it remained competent ‘to deal with applications directed against the Russian Federation in relation to acts or omissions capable of constituting a violation of the Convention provided that they occurred until 16 September 2022’: <https://echr.coe.int/Documents/Resolution_ECHR_cessation_membership_Russia_CoE_ENG.pdf>, accessed 8 February 2023.

21 Vikarská Z, ‘The many troubles of the Fedotova judgment’ (Verfassungsblog, 24 January 2023) <https://verfassungsblog.de/the-many-troubles-of-the-fedotova-judgment/>, accessed 8 February 2023.

22 She also wonders – as do I – why a Russian judge was still sitting in the Grand Chamber on 27 April 2022 when Russia had ceased to be a member of the Council of Europe on 16 March. It was that issue that gave rise to the dissenting opinion of Judge Poláčková, the judge in respect of Slovakia.

23 Gill-Pedro E, ‘No New Rights in Fedotova’ (Verfassungsblog, 27 January 2023), <https://verfassungsblog.de/no-new-rights-in-fedotova/>, accessed 8 February 2023.

24 Bartenev D, ‘Will Russia Yield to the ECtHR?’ (Verfassungsblog, 16 July 2021), <https://verfassungsblog.de/will-russia-yield-to-the-ecthr/>, accessed 8 February 2023.

25 Fidele G, ‘Milestone or missed opportunity? The ECtHR Grand Chamber judgment in Fedotova v Russia on the legal recognition of same-sex couples’ (EJIL: Talk!, 31 January 2023), <https://www.ejiltalk.org/milestone-or-missed-opportunity-the-ecthr-grand-chamber-judgment-in-fedotova-v-russia-on-the-legal-recognition-of-same-sex-couples/>, accessed 8 February 2023.

26 Schalk and Kopf v Austria [2010] ECHR 1996.

27 Ibid at para 61.

28 Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, Resolution 2239 (2018), ‘Private and family life: achieving equality regardless of sexual orientation’, <https://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-en.asp?fileid=25166>, accessed 8 February 2023.

29 Hirst v United Kingdom (no. 2) [2005] ECHR 681.