THE ILLUSION OF THE EQUAL RIGHT TO MARRY: THE EUROPEAN UNION PROTECTING THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF CITIZENS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE EU INTERNAL MARKET

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.52340/lm.2022.02.06

Keywords:

European Court of Justice, Coman Case, Homosexual spouses, Free movement directive 2004/38, Marriage Recognition, EU Internal Market, Cross-border marriage

Abstract

In Coman and Others v. Romania case, The European Court of Justice by request of Romanian Constitutional Court was tasked to determine whether the term spouse includes Homosexual married couples for the purposes of EU free movement Directive 2004/38. In June 2018, The European Court of Justice has held that the term “Spouse” within the meaning of EU law with regard the freedom of residency of EU citizens and their family members includes Homosexual spouses. This Court ruling has been considered as great victory for homosexual couples striving to achieve equal rights in marriage. Yet celebration of illusionary marriage equality is exaggerated.

Author Biography

Tsisia Okropiridze

Ph.D. Candidate at Grigol Robakidze University

Researcher at Prince David Institute for Law of Sulkhan-Saba Orbeliani University

References

Titshaw S., Sam-Sex Spouses Lost in Translation? How to Interpret “Spouse” in the EU Family Migration Directives, Boston University International Law Journal, Vol. 34:45, 2016, 51-52.

Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, art. 21(1).

Same-Sex Couples, Free Movement of EU citizens, Migration and Asylum, European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2009.

2009 წელს როდესაც ძალაში შევიდა ლისაბონის ხელშეკრულება, მისი ერთ-ერთი მიზანი იყო საერთო საემიგრაციო პოლიტიკის არსებობა კავშირის შიგნით. იხ., Consolidated Version of the Treaty of Lisbon, art. 63, 2007, O.J. (C 340/01), 61.

Gyeney L., Same Sex Couple’s Rights to Free Movement in Light of Member States’ National Identities: Legal Analysis of the Coman Case, Iustum Aequum Salutare XIV, 2018, 153.

Tryfonidou A., Awaiting the ECJ Judgment in Coman: Towards the Cross-Border Legal Recognition of Same-Sex Marriages in the EU?, EU Law Analysis, 2017.

Boele-Woelki, K., The principles of European family law: its aims and prospects, Utrech Law Review, Vol. 1, Issue 2, 2005, 160-161.

Lipka M., Masci M., Where Europe stands on gay marriage and civil unions, Pew Research Center, 2019; დამატ., იხ., Felter C., Renwick D., Same-Sex Marriage: Global Comparisons, 2020.

Boele-Woelki K., Legal Recognition of Same-Sex Relationships in Europe, Tulane Law Review, Vol. 82:1949, 2009, 1955-1956.

ეს ქვეყნებია: ბულგარეთი, პოლონეთი, სლოვაკეთი, უნგრეთი, ლატვია და ლიტვა; იხ., Stehlík V., The CJEU Crossing Rubicon On The Same-Sex Marriages? Commentary on Coman Case, ICLR, Vol. 18, No. 2, 2018, 87.

Commissioner publishes observations on the absence of legal recognition of same-sex relationships in Romania, Council of Europe, 2020.

The rights of LGBTI people in the European Union, European Parliament Briefing, 2016.

Tryfonidou A., Awaiting the ECJ Judgment in Coman: Towards the Cross-Border Legal Recognition of Same-Sex Marriages in the EU? EU Law Analysis, 2017.

Kochenov D., The Right to Have What Rights? EU Citizenship in Need of Clarification, 19 European Law Journal, 2013, 502-503.

Case C-673/16 Coman, Hamilton and Asociaţia Accept v Inspectoratul General pentru Imigrări and

Ministerul Afacerilor Interne EU:C:2018:385

აღსანიშნავია, რომ ლუქსემბურგის სასამართლოს წინასწარი გადაწყვეტილების პროცედურა არ გულისხმობს დავის გადაწყვეტას, ის შემოიფარგლება იმ საკითხებზე ინტეპრეტაციებით, რასაც მას წევრი სახელმწიფოს სასამართლოები დაავალებენ. დავას საბოლოოდ წყვეტს, წევრი სახელლმწიფოს სასამართლო; იხ., https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM%3Al14552

Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC.

Coman Case C-673/16.

Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 2012, OJ C 326/02.

Article 7, EU Charter, Article 9, EU Charter, Article 21, EU Charter, Article 45, EU Charter.

Opinion of Advocate General Wathelet in Coman Case, 2018; აღსანიშნავია, რომ გენერალური ადვოკატის მოსაზრებას არ აქვს სავალდებულო ძალა. გენერალურ ადვოკატებს ევალებათ სასამართლოს მიაწოდონ საქმესთან დაკავშირებით სამართლებრივი გამოსავალი.

Freedom of movement and same-sex couples in Romania: The Coman case, Briefing Note, ILGA-EUROPE.

საუბარია ევროკავშირის მნიშვნელოვან ხელშეკრულებებზე, როგორი-ცაა ევროკავშირის ფუნქციონირების შესახებ ხელშეკრულება და ევროკავშირის ადამიანის უფლებათა ქარტია.

ევროკავშირის მართლმსაჯულების სასამართლოსთვის გარკვეული კითხვების გადაგზავნა წინასწარი გადაწყვეტილების მიღებისთვის ემსახურება იმ მიზანს, რომ განმარტოს ევროკავშირის ის კონკრეტული კანონი და დაადგინოს გამოიყენება თუ არა იგი მთელი კავშირის ფარგლებში ერთნაირად.

იმ ინსტანციის სასამართლოები, რომელთა გადაწყვეტილებაც არ ექვემდებარება გასაჩივრებას, ვალდებულნი არიან მიმართონ ევრო-კავშირის მართლმსაჯულების სასამართლოს იმ შემთხვევაში, თუკი გაურკვეველია, თუ როგორ უნდა იქნეს გამოყენებული ევროკავშირის კანონ-მდებლობა წევრი სახელმწიფოს ეროვნულ სამართლებრივ კონტექსტში.

The Coman case, Briefing Note, ILGA-EUROPE

Tryfonidou A., Awaiting the ECJ Judgment in Coman: Towards the Cross-Border Legal Recognition of Same-Sex Marriages in the EU? EU Law Analysis, 2017.

იხ. Regulation 1612/68 and Directive 73/148.

Case C-456/12 O and B v Minister voor Immigratie, Integratie en Asiel EU:C:2014 :135, para. 51.

Case C-218/14 Singh and Others v Minister for Justice and Equality (2015), ECLI:EU:C:2015:476. იხ. Coman Case C-673/16.

Advocate General Melchior Wathelet in his Opinion in Coman, 2018, 38.

76. იხ. Case C-267/06, Tadao Maruko v. Versorgungsanstalt der deutschen Biihnen, 2008, 58; ase C-443/15,

David L. Parris v Trinity College Dublin and Others 2016, 58.

Coman, AG Opinion, 37. იქვე. 34.

იქვე. 38; იხ. მოქალაქეობასთან, პიროვნების სახელებთან დაკავში-რებით, იხ. 2003, Garcia Avello (C‑148/02, EU:C:2003:539, paragraph 25); პირდაპირ დაბეგვრასთან დაკავშირებით იხ.1995, Schumacker (C‑279/93, EU:C:1995:31, paragraph 21); სისხლის სამართლის საკითხებთან დაკავშირებით 1999, Calfa (C‑348/96, EU:C:1999:6, paragraph 17).

Coman, AG Opinion, 48; იხ. Case C-127/09 Metock EU:C:2008:449, 98.

Coman, AG Opinion, Footnote 25.

Joined Cases C-122 & 125/99 P D and Sweden v Council EU:C:2001:304, 34.

Coman, AG Opinion, 32 იხ. According to Advocate General Wathelet, the term ‘spouse’ includes, in the light of

the freedom of residence of citizens of the EU and their family members, spouses of the same sex Court of Justice of the European

იქვე, 44; იხ., Bogendorff von Wolffersdorff, C 438/14, EU:C:2016:401, 67.

იხ., The Taddeucci and McCall v. Italy, [ECtHR], Application no.51362/09, 2016, 93 ; იხ., ასევე, Koffeman N., Taddeucci and McCall v. Italy: welcome novelty in the ECtHR’s case-law on equal treatment of same-sex couples, Strasbourg Observer, 2016.

Coman Case, 18; 19.

Case 6/64, Flaminio Costa v ENEL [1964] ECR 585; იხ., Stiernstom M., The Relationship Between Community Law and National Law, monographic papers, Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series.]

Vol. 5 No. 33, Miami European Union Center, 2015, 2.

Gombos K., EU Law Through the Eyes of a National Judge, Conference Paper: EU Legislative Drafting: Views from those applying EU law in the Member States’, 2018, 4.

ეს პრინიცპი გულისხმობს, რომ უზენაესმა სასამართლომ შეძლების-დაგვარად თავიდან უნდა აიცილოს კონსტიტუციურ საკითხებზე გადაწყვეტილების მიღება და გადაწყვეტილება მიიღოს კანონის (ნორმატიული აქტის) საფუძველზე.

იხ., https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/constitutional_avoidance

Lenaerts K., Gutierrez-Fins J.S., To say What The Law of The EU Is: Methods of Interpretation and The European Court of Justice, Columbia Journal European Law, Vol 20.2, 2014; იხ., Case C-403/99, Italy v. Comm’n, 2001 E.C.R. I-6897, 37.

Titshaw S., Sam-Sex Spouses Lost in Translation? How to Interpret “Spouse” in The E.U Family Migration Directives,2016, 76.

Guild E., EU Citizens, Foreign Family Members and European Union Law, European Journal of Migration and Law, Vol. 21: Issue 3, 2019.

Garcia Avello C-148/02, ECLI:EU:C:2003:539; Grunkin Paul judgment, C-353/06, CLI:EU:C:2008:559; იხ,. Gyeney L., Same Sex Couple’s Rights to Free Movement in Light of Member States’ National Identities: Legal Analysis of the Coman Case, 2018, 162-163.

Bell M., Eu Directive on Free Movement and Same-Sex Families: Guidelines on the Implementation Process, The European Region of the International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA-Europe),2005, 5.

Kochenov d., After the celebration: Marriage equality in EU Law post-Coman in eight questions and some further thoughts, Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, vol.27(5), 2020, 555-556.

Kochenov D., The Right to Have What Rights? EU Citizenship in Need of Clarification. European Law Journal, Vol. 19., Iss. 4, 2013 502; იხ., ასევე Kochenov D. Belavuasu – U., On the "entry options" for the "right to love": Federalizing legal opportunities for LGBT movements in the EU. EUI Working papers, 2016, 11.

Orlandi and Others v Italy (Applications nos. 26431/12; 26742/12; 44057/12 and 60088/12).

Lack of legal recognition of same-sex unions in Italy violated rights of six couples married abroad, Press Release, European Court of Human Rights, 2017.

Tryfonidou A.,Free Movement of Same-Sex Spouses within the EU: The ECJ’s Coman judgment, European Law Blog, 2018.

Tryfonidou A.,The EU Top Court Rules that Married Same Sex Couples Can Move Freely Between EU Member States as “Spouses”: Case C 673/16, Relu Adrian Coman, Robert Clabourn Hamilton, Asociaţia Accept v Inspectoratul General pentru Imigrări, Ministerul Afacerilor Interne, Feminist Legal Studies 27, Springer, 2019, 219-220.

წევრი სახელმწიფოს კომპეტენციაზე, თავად დაარეგულიროს ქორწინების ინსტიტუტის გარშემო სამართლებრივი საკითხები, არაერთ ცნობილ საქმეზე იქნა აღნიშნული. იხ., Case C-147/08 Römer v. Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg, ECLI:EU:C:2010:425, 2011, 175; იხ., ასევე Parris, Case C-443/15, EU:C:2016:897, 2016, 59.

Kochenov D., Belavusau U., After the celebration: Marriage equality in EU Law post-Coman in eight questions and some further thoughts, Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, Vol. 27(5), 2020, 556.

Kochenov D.,On Options of Citizens and Moral Choices of States: Gays and European Federalism, Fordham International Law Journal 33, 2009, 169

Kochenov D., Belavusau U., After the celebration: Marriage equality in EU Law post-Coman in eight questions and some further thoughts, 2020, 563-564

Brink M. V. D., Is the Reasoning in “Coman” as Good as the Result? 2018.

Belavusau U., The Federal Rainbow Dream: On Free Movement of Gay Spouses under EU Law, 2018.

იხ., Molnar T., The concept of autonomy of EU law from the comparative perspective of international law and the legal systems of Member States, Hungarian Yearbook of International Law and European Law, The Hague, Eleven International Publishing, 2016.

Titshaw S., Sam-Sex Spouses Lost in Translation? How to Interpret “Spouse” in The E.U Family Migration Directives, Boston University International Law Journal vol 34:45, 2016.

Gyeney L., Same-Sex Couples’ Right to Free Movement in Light of Member states’ National Identities: the Legal analysis of Coman Case, Iustum Aequum Salutare XIV. 2018, 149-151.

Eastern and Western Europeans Differ on Importance of Religion, Views of Minorities, and Key Social Issues, Pew Research Center, 2018.

Art. 4 (3) Treaty on European Union.

„ერთგული ურთიერთანამშრომლობის“ პრინციპი არის ევროკავშირის წევრ სახელმწიფოებსა და ევროკავშირის ინსტიტუტებს შორის ევროკავ-ირის კანონით გათვალისწინებული მთავარი კონსტიტუციური პრინციპი. იხ., Hillion C., Mixity and coherence in EU external relations: The significance of the duty of cooperation, CLEER Working Papers,2009/2.

Kochenov D., Belavusau U., After the celebration: Marriage equality in EU Law post-Coman in eight questions and some further thoughts, 2020, 562.

Tryfonidou A.,The EU Top Court Rules that Married Same Sex Couples Can Move Freely Between EU Member States as “Spouses”: Case C 673/16, Relu Adrian Coman, Robert Clabourn Hamilton, Asociaţia Accept v Inspectoratul General pentru Imigrări, Ministerul Afacerilor Interne, 2019, 208.

Stehlík V., The CJEU Crossing Rubicon On The Same-Sex Marriages? Commentary on Coman Case, 2018, 96.

Tryfonidou, A., An analysis of the ECJ ruling in Case C-673/16 Coman, The right of same-sex spouses under EU law to move freely between EU member states, research report for NELFA, 2019, pp. 13-14.

Case C-456/12 O and B v Minister voor Immigratie, Integratie en Asiel EU:C:2014 :135, 51.

United States v. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. 2675, 2013.

Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 US, 2015.

Advocate General Opinion in Coman Case, 33-58.

Coman Judgment 36, 40, 42, 45, 46.

Rudevska B., The “Coman” Case (C-673/16): Some reflections from the point of view of private international law, Views and News in Private International Law, 2018.

Ph.D. Candidate at Grigol Robakidze University, Researcher at Prince David Institute for Law of Sulkhan-Saba Orbeliani University. orcid.org/0000-0002-4084-4895.

Published

2021-07-15

How to Cite

Tsisia Okropiridze. (2021). THE ILLUSION OF THE EQUAL RIGHT TO MARRY: THE EUROPEAN UNION PROTECTING THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF CITIZENS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE EU INTERNAL MARKET . JOURNAL "LEGAL METHODS&Quot;, 1(4). https://doi.org/10.52340/lm.2022.02.06

Issue

Section

Articles