Communicated on 20 June 2020
Published on 6 July 2020
FIRST SECTION
Application no. 18822/18
Barbara Gabriela STARSKA
against Poland
lodged on 10 April 2018
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The applicant, Ms Barbara Gabriela Starska, is a Polish national, who was born in 1987 and lives in Łódź. She is represented before the Court by Ms K. Gierdal, a lawyer practising in Warsaw.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
Since 2011 the applicant lives in a stable relationship with her same-sex partner. They cohabit and in 2015 they purchased a flat together. They have a common bank account.
On 26 January 2015 the applicant applied to the Łódź Civil Status Office seeking to change her surname to that of her same-sex partner. The applicant explained that there had been important reasons for the change as she felt close to her partner and her family. At the same time she was not particularly attached to her own surname as she had not been close to her father, and her mother no longer held that surname. Her partner supported the applicant’s request.
On 23 March 2015 the Łódź Civil Status Office dismissed the applicant’s request, finding that her de facto partnership with her same-sex partner did not constitute a significant reason required by law.
The applicant appealed.
On 27 May 2015 the Łódź Governor (Wojewoda Łódzki) upheld the decision. The Governor underlined that same-sex couples were “not known to Polish law”. At the same time a right to change a surname to that of a spouse was one of the advantages of a marriage, understood by law as a union of a man and a woman. The domestic law offered no protection to same-sex couples and allowing a change of name to same-sex couples would “create an illusion that they form a family”.
On 21 October 2015 the Łódź Regional Administrative Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal. The court stated that forming a household with a person, no matter his or her gender, should not have had legal consequences for a change of surname.
On 10 October 2017 the Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the applicant’s cassation appeal.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complains under Article 8 of the Convention that she was prevented from changing her surname to that of her partner. She underlined that under Polish law she and her partner had no right to marry or to enter into any other form of civil union.
She further complains that the situation amounted to a breach of Article 14 of the Convention, taken together with Article 8, as she was discriminated against on the ground of her sexual orientation.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Was the interference with the applicant’s right to respect for her private and family life, namely the refusal to change the applicant’s surname, in accordance with the law and necessary in terms of Article 8 § 2?
2. Has the applicant suffered discrimination in the enjoyment of her Convention rights on the ground of her sexual orientation, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention in conjunction with Article 8 of the Convention in respect of her inability to change her surname to that of her same-sex partner?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy