Elan-Cane, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another: CA 10 Mar 2020

No right to non-gendered passport

The claimant sought judicial review of the police of the respondent’s policy requiring a passport applicant to identify themselves as either male or female. The claimant began life as a female, but, with surgery, asserted a non-gendered identity.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘Where it has been held that there is an interference with an Article 8 (or Article 14) right, the domestic courts ‘must confront the interference with a Convention right and decide whether the justification claimed for it has been made out’. Whilst here the Appellant’s Article 8 rights have been engaged, there has been no interference with the Appellant’s Article 8 right to respect for private life. In any event in my judgment even if there had been such interference, the SSHD has, in my view, successfully made out her claim of justification and the position of the SSHD would have represented a limited and proportionate interference with those Article 8 rights.’

King, Irwin, Henderson LJJ
[2020] EWCA Civ 363, [2020] WLR(D) 157
Bailii,
European Convention on Human Rights 8
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromElan-Cane, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another Admn 22-Jun-2018
Challenge to the lawfulness of the current policy of Her Majesty’s Passport Office to require those who apply for the issue of a passport to declare whether their gender is either male or female, and that a passport will only be issued bearing an . .
CitedRegina v Special Adjudicator ex parte Ullah; Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 17-Jun-2004
The applicants had had their requests for asylum refused. They complained that if they were removed from the UK, their article 3 rights would be infringed. If they were returned to Pakistan or Vietnam they would be persecuted for their religious . .
CitedRees v The United Kingdom ECHR 17-Oct-1986
The applicant had been born and registered as a female, but later came to receive treatment and to live as a male. He complained that the respondent had failed to amend his birth certificate.
Held: The court accepted that, by failing to confer . .
CitedGoodwin v The United Kingdom ECHR 11-Jul-2002
The claimant was a post operative male to female trans-sexual. She claimed that her human rights were infringed when she was still treated as a man for National Insurance contributions purposes, where she continued to make payments after the age at . .
CitedKopf And Liberda v Austria ECHR 17-Jan-2012
The court was concerned as to whether there was a positive obligation in relation to the interests of a foster carer and a foster child.
Held: The first step was to determine whether Article 8 was engaged. Having found that it was, the court . .
CitedHamalainen v Finland ECHR 16-Jul-2014
ECHR Grand Chamber – Article 8-1
Respect for family life
Respect for private life
Refusal to give applicant female identity number following sex change unless marriage was transformed into civil . .
CitedBellinger v Bellinger HL 10-Apr-2003
Transgendered Male/Female not to marry as Female
The parties had gone through a form of marriage, but Mrs B had previously undergone gender re-assignment surgery. Section 11(c) of the 1973 Act required a marriage to be between a male and a female. It was argued that the section was incompatible . .
CitedSchalk and Kopf v Austria ECHR 22-Nov-2010
The applicants, a same sex couple sought the right to marry.
Held: The application failed. Same-sex couples are in a relevantly similar situation to different-sex couples as regards their need for legal recognition and protection of their . .
CitedVan Kuck v Germany ECHR 12-Jun-2003
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 ; Violation of Art. 8 ; No separate issue under Art. 14 ; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award ; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic . .
CitedVan Kuck v Germany ECHR 12-Jun-2003
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 ; Violation of Art. 8 ; No separate issue under Art. 14 ; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award ; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic . .
CitedSchalk and Kopf v Austria ECHR 24-Jun-2010
The applicants alleged discrimination in that as a same sex couple they were not allowed to marry.
Held: There was no violation.
The Court cannot but note that there is an emerging European consensus towards legal recognition of same-sex . .
CitedSchalk and Kopf v Austria ECHR 24-Jun-2010
The applicants alleged discrimination in that as a same sex couple they were not allowed to marry.
Held: There was no violation.
The Court cannot but note that there is an emerging European consensus towards legal recognition of same-sex . .
CitedSteinfeld 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 . .
CitedMcLaughlin, Re Judicial Review SC 30-Aug-2018
The applicant a differently sexed couple sought to marry under the Civil Partnership Act 2004, but complained that they would lose the benefits of widowed parent’s allowance. Parliament had decided to delay such rules to allow assessment of reaction . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Human Rights

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.648607