The claimant, a homosexual woman, complained that her homosexuality had meant her disqualification from adopting a child.
Held: There is no right to foster, but the provision was an unlawful discrimination. The denial of adoption to a woman in a same sex relationship could not be justified.
Where the difference in treatment is based on sexual orientation, a court must apply ‘strict scrutiny’ to the assessment of any asserted justification: ‘particularly convincing and weighty reasons to justify’ it are required
Citations:
[2008] ECHR 55, (2008) 47 EHRR 21, 43546/02, [2008] 1 FLR 850, [2008] 1 FCR 235, 23 BHRC 741
Links:
Statutes:
European Convention on Human Rights 9
Jurisdiction:
Human Rights
Citing:
See Also – EB v France ECHR 14-Mar-2007
A homosexual woman complained that she had not been allowed to adopt a child. Her application was rejected by the French administrative court on grounds based substantially upon her sexual orientation.
Held: The provision was an unlawful . .
Cited by:
See Also – EB v France ECHR 30-Sep-2009
. .
Cited – Johns and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Derby City Council and Another Admn 28-Feb-2011
The claimants had acted as foster carers for several years, but challenged a potential decision to discontinue that when, as committed Christians, they refused to sign to agree to treat without differentiation any child brought to them who might be . .
Cited – Steinfeld and Keidan, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for International Development (In Substitution for The Home Secretary and The Education Secretary) SC 27-Jun-2018
The applicants, an heterosexual couple wished to enter into a civil partnership under the 2004 Act, rather than a marriage. They complained that had they been a same sex couple they would have had that choice under the 2013 Act.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Human Rights, Adoption, Discrimination
Updated: 03 September 2022; Ref: scu.430274
