BURGHARTZ v. SWITZERLAND - 16213/90 - Chamber Judgment [1994] ECHR 2 (22 February 1994)

BURGHARTZ v. SWITZERLAND - 16213/90 - Chamber Judgment [1994] ECHR 2 (22 February 1994)

The Court held that the difference of treatment in Swiss law, which allowed only wives to add their surname before the family name but not husbands, lacked objective and reasonable justification and thus constituted discrimination on the ground of sex, in violation of Article 14 taken together with Article 8 of the Convention.

Citation
[1994] ECHR 2
Parties
Applicant: Mr Albert Burghartz; Applicant: Mrs Susanna Burghartz; Respondent: Swiss Confederation
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
22 February 1994
Procedural Posture
Application to the European Court of Human Rights / Judgment After Hearing and Submissions
Outcome
Violation of Article 14 taken together with Article 8; partial award of costs and expenses; other claims dismissed.
Legal Topics
Discrimination Based on Sex, Right to Respect for Private and Family Life, Equality of Spouses, Surnames and Naming Rights
Human Rights Law Family Law Discrimination Based on Sex Right to Respect for Private and Family Life Equality of Spouses Surnames and Naming Rights

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Albert Burghartz

Applicant

Mrs Susanna Burghartz

Applicant

Swiss Confederation

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to the European Court of Human Rights / Judgment After Hearing and Submissions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the refusal to allow a husband to add his surname before the family name, when wives are permitted to do so, constitutes discrimination based on sex contrary to Article 14 taken with Article 8 of the Convention
  2. 2 Whether Article 8 of the Convention applies to the assignment of married couples’ family names

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the difference of treatment in Swiss law, which allowed only wives to add their surname before the family name but not husbands, lacked objective and reasonable justification and thus constituted discrimination on the ground of sex, in violation of Article 14 taken together with Article 8 of the Convention.

Court Disposition

Violation of Article 14 taken together with Article 8; partial award of costs and expenses; other claims dismissed.

Orders

  • Dismissed the Government’s preliminary objections.
  • Held Article 8 applies.