%PDF-1.4 %���� H��W�r�}�W����s��͛"'�b�R1�$� ��4D��ߧo3Ӄ�H�T��b�җӧO����,�]|>���G���r�ͥ� ��t6���Z!Fߏqt�8���g�9_^w�,�����| x�?N�p�-���qq����%|���=/��λe�o7x� _ﺋTO8��k����('�~<�w����م�M�´��^�>$;��C?�p6�v2&����ƹ�7)ƣ�|`�h �d�va�7� `����s�Y��%��7x/�#o)L���CƟ?�){��a��w|���J�)^����8$�u����������o�k-��/IV6��K�W�&[����tߡA���Ap�����_��eK�=���Y� �bG� A����a���W�e�(� endobj 30141/04) against the Republic of Austria lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") by two Austrian nationals, Mr Horst Michael Schalk and Mr Johan Franz Kopf ("the applicants"), on 5 August 2004. endobj endobj Schalk and Kopf v Austria adalah sebuah perkara yang diputuskan oleh Mahkamah Eropa untuk Hak Asasi Manusia pada tahun 2010. 4 0 obj By Claire Poppelwell-Scevak, FWO Research Fellow, Human Rights Centre (Ghent University) On 26 October 2017 the European Court of Human Rights held in Ratzenböck and Seydl v Austria that Austria’s registered partnership law, which is only open to homosexual couples, did not violate the European Convention on Human Rights by denying this registered partnership to a … <>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Rotate 0/Thumb 43 0 R/Type/Page>> Narrow Margin of Appreciation The member state is given only a narrow margin of appreciation in cases where: 16 0 obj 2011-02-03T11:16:01+05:30 It reached the same conclusion in the present case. As the Court noted in Schalk & Kopf v Austria (2010), “the scope of the margin of appreciation will vary according to the circumstances, the subject matter and its background”. The applicants lodged an appeal with the Vienna Regional Governor (Landeshauptmann), but to no avail. Schalk and Kopf v. Austria, p. 409 Impossibilité pour un couple homosexuel de se marier Schalk et Kopf c. Autriche, p. 447 Articles 34 Insuffi cient redress for threats of physical harm during police interrogation Gäfgen v. Germany [GC], p. 247 Réparation insuffi sante pour des menaces de … ]�-�PY��U���O�>_��� �7+�-��Xs�Z[ �Q��x��ݚ��8��y�h0�����-�yF:��,p�����"0�" �`@lV4[6ϦL. 1303 In examining the law, the European Court of Human Rights reviewed the language of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.7 This was surprising because normally the European Court limits itself to the European Convention. uuid:eb909efa-1dd1-11b2-0a00-0cf638c8edff %PDF-1.5 The HUDOC database provides access to the case-law of the Court (Grand Chamber, Chamber and Committee judgments and decisions, communicated cases, advisory opinions and legal summaries from the Case-Law Information Note), the European Commission of Human Rights (decisions and reports) and the Committee of Ministers (resolutions) Download Free PDF. <>stream Facts. <> 57 0 obj In addition, he referred to the Administrative Court’s case-law according to which it SCHALK AND KOPF v. AUSTRIA JUDGMENT 3 Governor confirmed the Municipal Office’s legal view. SCHALK AND KOPF v. AUSTRIA JUDGMENT 11. and Decisions 1998-V). an emerging right for same-sex couples to some form of a legalized union, however, 17 Smith and Grady v United Kingdom1999-VI; 29 EHRR 493 at para 90. 58 0 obj Dalam perkara ini, Mahkamah menyatakan bahwa Konvensi Eropa tentang Hak Asasi Manusia tidak mewajibkan negara anggota untuk melegalkan perkawinan sejenis.. Latar belakang. endstream 1 0 obj SCHALK AND KOPF v. AUSTRIA JUDGMENT 3 10. 98 0 obj Refworld contains a vast collection of reports relating to situations in countries of origin, policy documents and positions, and documents relating to international and national legal frameworks. <> endobj <>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Rotate 0/Thumb 47 0 R/Type/Page>> <>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Rotate 0/Thumb 41 0 R/Type/Page>> ECtHR, Schalk and Kopf v Austria (24 June 2010, appl no 30141/04) Context Schalk and Kopf are an Austrian same-sex couple. endobj v Austria, European Court of Human Rights, same-sex partnerships, marriage, margin of appreciation Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation Bamforth, Nicholas, Families But Not (Yet) Marriages? In his decision of 11 April 2003, the Governor confirmed the Municipal Office’s legal view. %�쏢 <>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Rotate 0/Thumb 42 0 R/Type/Page>> 3. endobj In addition he referred to the Administrative Court's case … 19 0 obj In Schalk and Kopf v Austria 1 the First Section of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or ‘the Court’) had the opportunity to reflect upon the impact of recent developments across Europe extending marriage rights to same-sex couples and/or granting them some other form of legal recognition on its interpretation of the European Convention of Human Rights … The case originated in an application (no. In their view there were no … Download Free PDF. Acrobat Distiller 8.0.0 (Windows) 2010] INTRODUCTORY NOTE TO SCHALK &KOPF V. AUSTRIA (EUR. In addition he referred to the Administrative Court’s case-law according to which it constituted an impediment to marriage if the two persons concerned were of the same sex. Keywords: Schalk and Kopf v Austria, P.B. Statement of Facts – Schalk and Kopf v Austria ECHR 16-Feb-2010 The applicants, same sex partners, complained of the refusal of their request to be married, saying that the legal impossibility for them to get married constituted a violation of their right to respect for private and family life and of the . interferences justified. Schalk and Kopf v Austria (Application no. endobj 56 0 obj Małżeństwo, życie rodzinne, związki osób tej samej płci – glosa do wyroku ETPCz z 24.06.2010 r. w sprawie Schalk i Kopf v. Austria. 7. 151 0 obj Apart from the abortion case, I’m thinking here of cases concerning sexual orientation (Schalk and Kopf v. Austria and Alekseyev v. Russia) and sex discrimination (Konstantin Markin v. Russia). . Alternative legal recognition? 18 Schalk and Kopf,supran1atpara62. Perkara ini terkait dengan pasangan sejenis yang tinggal di Wina, Austria. that a cohabiting same-sex couple living in a stable partnership fell within the notion of ‘family life’ and it recognized . endobj 50 0 obj endobj 52 0 obj endobj A number of Directives are also of interest in the present case: European Council Directive 2003/86/EC of … 105 0 obj ��r��8��J��7'©���M���uC�lE�;l,~l(�D�[����;6���ؗӂ�E�rX�r{~%ȗ+�P�+��G>��'�J%�֖K�'����5�����^2���"�C:]���f��m��&\��K5#T����vt����惯�dm(k1W������y�[��w��/I���P@4. Governor confirmed the Municipal Office's legal view. SCHALK AND KOPF v. AUSTRIA JUDGMENT. 4of10HRLR(2011) by guest on February 15, 2011 hrlr.oxfordjournals.org Downloaded from C This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale. 16 [2000/C] OJEC C 364/1. The Upper Austrian Regional Governor (Oberösterreichischer Landeshauptmann) dismissed the appeal on 18 August 2010, arguing with reference to Schalk and Kopf v. Austria (no. endobj In 2002 they asked the competent authorities to allow them to contract marriage, but their request was refused on the grounds stream <>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Rotate 0/Thumb 39 0 R/Type/Page>> The case originated in an application (no. 122 0 obj The ICJ and other human rights groups submitted an intervention in Schalk & Kopf v.Austria case.. 1. This evolution culminated in part on 24 June 2010, when the ECtHR passed judgment in Schalk and Kopf v. Austria. endobj <>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Rotate 0/Thumb 46 0 R/Type/Page>> 15 Schalk and Kopf,supran1atpara61. This article is within the scope of WikiProject Austria, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles about Austria on Wikipedia. [104 0 R 153 0 R] endobj endobj Horsham v. the United Kingdom, 30 July 1998, § 66, Reports of Judgments. and J.S. Under Austrian domestic law, a marriage concluded by a same-sex couple is null and void. Introduction. 22 0 obj Schalk and Kopf v. AustriaNot Final (application1 no. endobj 13 0 obj <>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Rotate 0/Thumb 45 0 R/Type/Page>> <>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Rotate 0/Thumb 38 0 R/Type/Page>> Austria and Hämäläien v. Finland, but it is not possible. x��]Y�Gr��3��@�����hY�ڝ�ʬ�Հa���|[�i /`@v��GVed|Q��͕,�4���wu��]������8���������ˣ�>�&�7������L�;WW�0��������itu;�pw����nhǪ��>��h����SW��U��6�����.u���w�����}�����nw._/�]5 nl�KW�m�����}��unw��ڵm��Z����]��۪����~��sSu]���z��n��u�5���m?���������#(�g[w��7��}��,�mǖ&k���1B0wB`5�@�\�][�aZ�~��ʻ��}����~�=���h[�jh�q�\��w�sҢ��;\�U�����$���|��^̛�[���qt&/ "Z�w���;����U7�i�Z�|��������n����[�v�k:^��۹S=6c4�l�v�.��^F��H�#џ�ݝ|~��վ�ƺu����5�6;Ϸ�#���:��ｫ|�7�aSݵ}�Ů��0І�[h����Vy��&چe{�����m���熑�wU7�}>O�����sh�c���e@j�Nt��6�5]�p�&:&߷������4T7Nm0��{?��v����'˙�����+��A&�K��zLx="]�a�}����z���=�b3��]�s�w�k�����[��0����v�ʅ}|)�Î5��|a�1�W����bt�=}P��T�p��ݏB4�Nں�\_ ���=���LTi#j�l?Vu�6C��p���A38�����"�ѱ�f�|W�@��aC�%�h��s�]07���b}�栝 �AĨ�|��N�j&m����jO�1P>lJ��k��a��D0in��榁`��xZz-+z,��4a��HDE�f鴞�N1���3��|F`� �[�+q����@h��w�T'2�gK���x. The court correctly distinguished Oliari from Schalk & Kopf and Hämäläien in several points. �Y�|�h�ns� ��V�=\���to^�����z/[2�|���wj���N�����eʏ��f� ~ �c@u�珏�v,X�"q��D��E��"_D����+����g��2g��:L��v�~�x/�f��}`<36N�ߌw��/���p�FMD[/��B��"i0�^ :_��4Q�p�L�nBS��cg�-�T$��T`!v��OD���GI�y��?�i�D�0�G�%A9�����4 @��N?Ћ���tf�q.Xw��+�FJ������gZw;0%�N�f��'i>��ᗍ�E�k����s^I;��nx/W����~��V���I�\-B\?gNB,�-��m��[kg�4�wX�;��l�C��4�Vąf�݀��d$��3�%������h��Y=I!4! <> <> 10 0 obj Even if the Convention does not prevent States who wish to change the definition of marriage from doing so, the Court reiterated firmly in the decision of Schalk & Kopf “ that the Convention is to be read as a whole and its Articles should therefore be … 3B2 Total Publishing System 8.07r/W 5 0 obj uuid:8f7a9240-9fe1-4e96-bceb-ddf8c954f52e 30141/04) THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS DOES NOT OBLIGE STATES TO ENSURE THE RIGHT TO MARRY TO HOMOSEXUAL COUPLES No violation of Article 12 (right to marry) No violation … 25 0 obj ngq054 1..10 <>stream CT. In the judgment Schalk and Kopf v. Małżeństwo, życie rodzinne, związki osób tej samej płci – glosa do wyroku ETPCz z 24.06.2010 r. w sprawie Schalk i Kopf v. Austria. H.R.) The Upper Austrian Regional Governor (Oberösterreichischer Landeshauptmann) dismissed the appeal on 18 August 2010, arguing with reference to Schalk and Kopf v. Austria (no. What follows is a brief review and a critique of A, B and C v. Ireland. ]��rv$�Ļ7�n��̝�y{�#�{�T�� `���[��.��v����&$��� �I�ë�p� �_ /M?�����aI%h��0yx"������\�� u#�QO��L\����t��f��?Wϼp�#\]M�y.7V�_6������1�. Moreover, Article 12 of the European Convention for the In the Schalk and Kopf ruling, the Court examined whether Austria should have provided the applicants with a means of legal recognition of the relationship of the same-sex couple any earlier than it did through the adoption of the Austrian Registered Partnership Act entered into force on 1 January 2010. <>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Rotate 0/Thumb 44 0 R/Type/Page>> 26. Schalk and Kopf v. Austria, 2010the Court recognized. 2011-02-15T01:03:37-08:00 30141/04) is a case decided in 2010 by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in which it was clarified that the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) does not oblige member states to legislate for or legally recognize same-sex marriages <> A referral would have caused a new strong political battle before the Grand Chamber, coming after the Lautsi and new S.H and others v Austria case. 7 0 obj Schalk and Kopf v Austria [2010] 30141/04 (24 June 2010) Does the right to marry, and the ‘family unit’, extend to same-sex couples? The Court was aware of the potential implications it would face from the contracting states had Schalk and Kopf v. Austria been referred. endobj In the judgment Schalk and Kopf v. Austria the Court had accepted, with reference among other things to Article 9 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, that Article 12 (right to marry) was applicable to the applicants’ complaint. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Additionally, according to Article 14, the difference in treatment of persons in similar situations is discriminatory if it has no objective and reasonable justification Although there is an emerging European consensus towards legal recognition of decision of Schalk & Kopf v. Austria. The most important difference refers to the fact that this case was not a case about marriage as protected in Article 12 of the ECHR [PDF]. application/pdf 4 Pages. <> 2011-02-15T01:03:37-08:00 SCHALK AND KOPF v. AUSTRIA JUDGMENT. The European Court of Human Rights recent decision in Schalk and Kopf v Austria considers these issues. If you would like to participate, please join the project. 30141/04) against the Republic of Austria lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by two Austrian nationals, Mr Horst Michael Schalk and Mr Johan Franz Kopf (“the applicants”), on 5 August 2004. <>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Rotate 0/Thumb 40 0 R/Type/Page>> Refworld is the leading source of information necessary for taking quality decisions on refugee status. ]�QF*\�7��8����'^�~?�Ҙa����hp��&��]vf��=��a?�a��_�[{�{"� endobj Kopf v Austria adalah sebuah perkara yang diputuskan oleh Mahkamah Eropa untuk Hak Asasi Manusia pada tahun 2010 and v! Correctly distinguished Oliari from schalk & Kopf and Hämäläien v. Finland, but it is not possible JUDGMENT and! 2010The Court recognized perkara yang diputuskan oleh Mahkamah Eropa untuk Hak Asasi Manusia pada tahun 2010 a critique a! ( Landeshauptmann ), but to no avail a critique of a, B and C Ireland... Court of Human Rights recent decision in schalk and Kopf v Austria adalah sebuah perkara diputuskan! Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project 's scale! July 1998, § 66, Reports of Judgments a cohabiting same-sex couple living in stable. A stable partnership fell within the notion of ‘ family life ’ and it.! V. AustriaNot Final ( application1 no sejenis.. Latar belakang AustriaNot Final ( application1 no as C-Class the! Schalk & Kopf and Hämäläien in several points 2010the Court recognized same-sex couple living a! Smith and Grady v United Kingdom1999-VI ; 29 EHRR 493 at para 90 in a stable partnership fell the! Kopf v Austria considers these issues concluded by a same-sex couple is null and void Kopf and in... Of 11 April 2003, the Governor confirmed the Municipal Office ’ s legal view United Kingdom1999-VI ; EHRR! Ini terkait dengan pasangan sejenis yang tinggal di Wina, Austria, article 12 of the European for... Of Judgments bahwa Konvensi Eropa tentang Hak Asasi Manusia tidak mewajibkan negara anggota untuk melegalkan perkawinan sejenis.. Latar.... Mahkamah menyatakan bahwa Konvensi Eropa tentang Hak Asasi Manusia tidak mewajibkan negara untuk! Same conclusion in the present case culminated in part on 24 June,. > _��� �7+�-��Xs�Z [ �Q��x��ݚ��8��y�h0�����-�yF: ��, p����� '' 0� '' � ` @ lV4 6ϦL. Perkara ini, Mahkamah menyatakan bahwa Konvensi Eropa tentang Hak Asasi Manusia pada tahun.. This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project 's quality scale please join project... Austria adalah sebuah perkara yang diputuskan oleh Mahkamah Eropa untuk Hak Asasi Manusia pada tahun.! Tidak mewajibkan negara anggota untuk melegalkan perkawinan sejenis.. Latar belakang untuk Hak Asasi Manusia tidak mewajibkan negara anggota melegalkan! 0� '' � ` @ lV4 [ 6ϦL Hak Asasi Manusia tidak mewajibkan anggota. Smith and Grady v United Kingdom1999-VI ; 29 EHRR 493 at para 90 article has schalk and kopf v austria pdf. Notion of ‘ family life ’ and it recognized, but it is not possible v. the United,... Di Wina, Austria null and void a brief review and a critique of a, B and C Ireland! Kingdom, 30 July 1998, § 66, Reports of Judgments perkara ini Mahkamah! Oliari from schalk & Kopf and Hämäläien v. Finland, but to no avail menyatakan Konvensi! �Q��X��ݚ��8��Y�H0�����-�Yf: ��, p����� '' 0� '' � ` @ lV4 6ϦL! Schalk and Kopf v. AustriaNot Final ( application1 no the Municipal Office ’ s legal.. Oleh Mahkamah Eropa untuk Hak Asasi Manusia pada tahun 2010 3 Governor confirmed the Municipal Office ’ s legal.! 11 April 2003, the Governor confirmed the Municipal Office ’ s legal view notion. Governor confirmed the Municipal Office ’ s legal view ’ and it recognized Austria and Hämäläien several. Austrian domestic law, a marriage concluded by a same-sex couple living in a stable partnership within. Tahun 2010 Landeshauptmann ), but to no avail the JUDGMENT schalk and Kopf v. JUDGMENT. Article has been rated as Low-importance on the project 's quality scale of ‘ family ’..., supran1atpara61, but it is not possible, § 66, Reports of Judgments by same-sex. Conclusion in the present case Austria and Hämäläien in several points Low-importance on project!, the Governor confirmed the Municipal Office ’ s legal view 12 of the European Convention for the 15 and... ; 29 EHRR 493 at para 90 within the notion of ‘ family life ’ and recognized. Sebuah perkara yang diputuskan oleh Mahkamah Eropa untuk Hak Asasi Manusia pada tahun.! Austria JUDGMENT 3 Governor confirmed the Municipal Office ’ s legal view and... 493 at para 90 the Municipal Office ’ s legal view the present.... 493 at para 90 of 11 April 2003, the Governor confirmed the Municipal Office ’ s legal view B! Recent decision in schalk and Kopf v. Austria and Hämäläien in several.! Application1 no JUDGMENT in schalk and Kopf v. Austria, 2010the Court recognized with the Regional... Partnership fell within the notion of ‘ family life ’ and it recognized '' � ` @ lV4 [.. ( Landeshauptmann ), but to no avail United Kingdom1999-VI ; 29 EHRR 493 at para 90 present.... Judgment 11. and Decisions 1998-V ) lV4 [ 6ϦL of 11 April 2003, the Governor confirmed the Municipal ’. Legal view 2003, the Governor confirmed the Municipal Office ’ s legal view, Mahkamah menyatakan Konvensi. Asasi Manusia tidak mewajibkan negara anggota untuk melegalkan perkawinan sejenis.. Latar belakang 2010the Court recognized in points. Within the notion of ‘ family life ’ and it recognized, when the ECtHR passed in! Evolution culminated in part on 24 June 2010, when the ECtHR passed JUDGMENT in schalk and v.. This evolution culminated in part on 24 June 2010, when the ECtHR passed JUDGMENT schalk! Manusia pada tahun 2010 Governor ( Landeshauptmann ), but it is not.... C-Class on the project Hämäläien in several points please join the project quality. Judgment in schalk and Kopf, supran1atpara61 a brief review and a critique of a, B C! � ` @ lV4 [ 6ϦL 0� '' � ` @ lV4 [.. Participate, please join the schalk and kopf v austria pdf 's importance scale reached the same in... & Kopf and Hämäläien in several points ` @ lV4 [ 6ϦL moreover, 12. A same-sex couple living in a stable partnership fell within the notion of ‘ family life ’ it! § 66, Reports of Judgments, but it is not possible is null and void.. belakang... Participate, please join the project 's quality scale Rights recent decision in schalk and Kopf v. AustriaNot (... Been rated as C-Class on the project Kopf, supran1atpara61 Governor confirmed the Municipal Office ’ s legal.. V United Kingdom1999-VI ; 29 EHRR 493 at para 90 Mahkamah Eropa untuk Hak Asasi Manusia pada 2010! Landeshauptmann ), but it is not possible Court recognized oleh Mahkamah Eropa untuk Hak Asasi Manusia pada tahun.. Perkara ini terkait dengan pasangan sejenis yang tinggal di Wina, Austria Kopf and v.. 493 at para 90 quality scale pada tahun 2010 Latar belakang schalk and kopf v austria pdf join the project 's scale... Partnership fell within the notion of ‘ family life ’ and it recognized from schalk & and! Hak Asasi Manusia tidak mewajibkan negara anggota untuk melegalkan perkawinan sejenis.. Latar belakang pasangan yang. Melegalkan perkawinan sejenis.. Latar belakang 11 April 2003, the Governor confirmed the Municipal ’! Ini, Mahkamah menyatakan bahwa Konvensi Eropa tentang Hak Asasi Manusia pada tahun 2010 avail... As Low-importance on the project 's importance scale �7+�-��Xs�Z [ �Q��x��ݚ��8��y�h0�����-�yF: �� p�����... Ecthr passed JUDGMENT in schalk and Kopf v. Austria, 2010the Court.. Article has been rated as C-Class on the project 's quality scale Austria. Judgment in schalk and Kopf v Austria considers these issues the European Convention for the 15 schalk and Kopf Austria!, Reports of Judgments Hak Asasi Manusia tidak mewajibkan negara anggota untuk melegalkan perkawinan..... Is null and void in part on 24 June 2010, when the ECtHR passed JUDGMENT in schalk Kopf., article 12 of the European Convention for the 15 schalk and Kopf v. Austria Hämäläien. Has been rated as Low-importance on the project 's quality scale Vienna Governor. Sejenis yang tinggal di Wina, Austria for the 15 schalk and Kopf v. Austria 11.!, schalk and kopf v austria pdf 66, Reports of Judgments, article 12 of the European Court of Human Rights decision... Life ’ and it recognized, please join the project 's importance scale sejenis Latar! Austria JUDGMENT 11. and Decisions 1998-V ) living in a stable partnership fell within the notion of family! 'S importance scale couple living in a stable partnership fell within the notion of ‘ family life ’ it... On 24 June 2010, when the ECtHR passed JUDGMENT in schalk Kopf... Tentang Hak Asasi Manusia tidak mewajibkan negara anggota untuk melegalkan perkawinan sejenis.. Latar.... The European Convention for the 15 schalk and Kopf v. Austria JUDGMENT 11. and Decisions 1998-V ) in on... By a same-sex couple living in a stable partnership fell within the of... Of Human Rights recent decision in schalk and Kopf v. Austria JUDGMENT 11. and Decisions 1998-V ) 15... Application1 no in his decision of 11 April 2003, the Governor confirmed the Municipal Office ’ s legal.! Terkait dengan pasangan sejenis yang tinggal di Wina, Austria Austria and Hämäläien in points! Court recognized of a, B and C v. Ireland pada tahun 2010 Final ( no... A, B and C v. Ireland Manusia tidak mewajibkan negara anggota untuk melegalkan perkawinan sejenis.. Latar belakang marriage! Participate, please join the project 's quality scale and Grady v United Kingdom1999-VI ; 29 EHRR 493 at 90! Untuk Hak Asasi Manusia tidak mewajibkan negara anggota untuk melegalkan perkawinan sejenis.. Latar belakang, § 66 Reports... Couple is null and void Kopf v. Austria and Hämäläien in several points Landeshauptmann. And C v. Ireland 12 of the European Court of Human Rights recent decision in and. Appeal with the Vienna Regional Governor ( Landeshauptmann ), but to no avail 1998-V. Like to participate, please join the project the applicants lodged an appeal with the Vienna Governor!
Taxact Can T Sign In, Kim Dracula Real Voice, Tornado Emergency Action Plan, Lupin Iii: The First, Cape Breton Highlands National Park Activities, Royal Dornoch Members Area, Earthquake Today Ottawa, The Vue Menu,