Today the European Court of Human Rights delivered its judgement in a case of P.B. and J.S. v. Austria. The Court said Austria violated the European Convention on Human Rights by excluding same-sex partners from insurance cover and once again affirmed same-sex partnership constitute ‘family life’ under the Convention.
The Court decided by five votes to two that Austria violated Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) in conjunction with Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) during the period until August 2006 when insurance cover in question was extended only to cohabiting opposite sex partners.
In August 2006 Austria amended its insurance act so same-sex couples could qualify for the extension of one partner’s insurance cover to the other partner only if they were raising children together. The Court unanimously found that there had also been a breach of Article 14 in conjunction with Article 8 in respect of the period of August 2006 and June 2007 as same-sex partners could only partially benefit from the insurance cover.
In July 2007, the newly amended version of the insurance act was formulated in a neutral way concerning the sexual orientation of cohabitees. The Court therefore unanimously considered that as of July 2007 P.B. and J.S. had no longer been subject to an unjustified difference in treatment as regards the benefit of extending health and accident insurance cover to P.B. and therefore Austria did not breach the Convention after July 2007.
This is the second judgement of the European Court of Human Rights involving the rights of same-sex partners and the Court one again affirmed that “cohabiting same-sex couple living in a stable de facto partnership, falls within the notion of “family life”, just as the relationship of a different-sex couple in the same situation would.”
The European Court of Human Rights made such a historical interpretation of the European Convention of Human Rights just month ago when on 24 June 2010, its delivered its judgement in a case of Schalk and Kopf v. Austria.
Press release and full judgement of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of P.B. and J.S. v. Austria
The Court decided by five votes to two that Austria violated Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) in conjunction with Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) during the period until August 2006 when insurance cover in question was extended only to cohabiting opposite sex partners.
In August 2006 Austria amended its insurance act so same-sex couples could qualify for the extension of one partner’s insurance cover to the other partner only if they were raising children together. The Court unanimously found that there had also been a breach of Article 14 in conjunction with Article 8 in respect of the period of August 2006 and June 2007 as same-sex partners could only partially benefit from the insurance cover.
In July 2007, the newly amended version of the insurance act was formulated in a neutral way concerning the sexual orientation of cohabitees. The Court therefore unanimously considered that as of July 2007 P.B. and J.S. had no longer been subject to an unjustified difference in treatment as regards the benefit of extending health and accident insurance cover to P.B. and therefore Austria did not breach the Convention after July 2007.
This is the second judgement of the European Court of Human Rights involving the rights of same-sex partners and the Court one again affirmed that “cohabiting same-sex couple living in a stable de facto partnership, falls within the notion of “family life”, just as the relationship of a different-sex couple in the same situation would.”
The European Court of Human Rights made such a historical interpretation of the European Convention of Human Rights just month ago when on 24 June 2010, its delivered its judgement in a case of Schalk and Kopf v. Austria.
Press release and full judgement of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of P.B. and J.S. v. Austria
0 comentarios:
Publicar un comentario