Conflict of Laws
  • About
  • Editorial board
  • Subscription
  • Submission
  • Materials
  • Contact
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu

German Court refuses Recognition of Same-Sex Marriages

August 18, 2006/in /by Veronika Gaertner
image_pdfimage_print

(VG Karlsruhe, judgment of 9 September 2004 – 2 K 1420/03; (2006) 3 IPRax, 284) 

The VG Karlsruhe (Administrative Court) decided in this judgment that a non-resident of the EU who has contracted a same-sex marriage with an EU resident is not a spouse in terms of Art.10 (1) lit. a Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community. Therefore the permit of residence was not granted for the length it has been applied for. The court refers in its explanations inter alia to a decision of the ECJ from 2001 (joined cases C-122/99 P and C-125/99 P), where the ECJ states that the term “marriage” characterizes – according to the definitions applying in the Member States – only a partnership of two persons of different sexes. Since then, only two Member States had changed their definition of “marriage” and included also partnerships between couples of the same sex, namely Belgium and the Netherlands (remark: after the judgment had been passed,  Spain also began to allow same-sex marriages in July 2005). The court argues now that a different interpretation of the term “spouse” was only justified if there had been already a social change in the whole EU – and not only in a few Member States. According to the VG, same-sex marriages can only be recognized if the State of recognition treats them as equivalent to traditional marriages. Since this is not the case in Germany (as only a registered partnership is possible between partners of the same sex), a recognition was not possible.

This decision has been discussed affirmative by Röthel (2006) 3 IPRax, 250, who argues that there is no obligation of the Member States to recognize the personal status of a person which has been obtained in another Member State which can be derived from the fundamental freedoms.

Comment: Another decision of interest in this context is one from the Tribunal administratif du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg of 3 October 2005 (N° 19509). Here the court held – in contrast to the German court – that a same-sex marriage which has been concluded in Belgium between a Belgian and a Madagascarian has to be recognized in Luxembourg according to Art.8 of the European Convention on Human Rights – despite the fact that same-sex marriages are unknown to Luxembourgian law. 

Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on X
  • Share on WhatsApp
  • Share on Pinterest
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Share on Vk
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Veronika Gaertner https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Veronika Gaertner2006-08-18 09:10:122006-11-25 15:22:01German Court refuses Recognition of Same-Sex Marriages

Categories

  • Views
  • News

Most Recent Posts

  • Conflicts of jurisdiction in Senegal: lesson from the Senegalese Supreme Court on Lis Pendens and the Exequatur of foreign judgments July 27, 2026
  • Adoption in the proposal for a European Parenthood Regulation July 21, 2026
  • Copyright, Targeting and Geo-Blocking: The CJEU Stirs the Pot July 15, 2026
  • A Follow-Up: The German Judges Association’s Response to the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions July 15, 2026
  • Private International Law Dimensions of Singapore’s New Legislation to Combat Online Harms July 14, 2026
  • The 1961 HCCH Apostille Convention: Why All African Countries Should Ratify It? — Insights from Judicial Practice in Africa July 14, 2026
  • The enforcement of an advance on costs for substitute performance at the expense of a Russian debtor in German-French legal relations July 2, 2026
  • “Yes, in principle, but not quite there yet…” – Some Observations on the Public Consultation on the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions June 29, 2026
  • Judgment Mobility Rules in India’s Private International Law Regime: No place for a revision au fond? June 26, 2026
  • Nothing to See Here: The CJEU’s Decision in Case C-232/25 Idzinski June 18, 2026
  • Refusal to Enforce in Egypt of a Californian (U.S.) Judgment for Lack of Reciprocity: What Has Gotten into the Egyptian Supreme Court? June 15, 2026
  • PRC Double Interest neither Double nor Penal: Australian Courts Clear Its Name When Enforcing Chinese Judgments June 10, 2026
  • The AIFC Court, Gazprom v Naftogaz and the Emergence of a New Conduit Jurisdiction Debate June 6, 2026
  • Montana Supreme Court Decides International Child Custody Case June 3, 2026
  • China’s Countering Improper Foreign Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Regulation Blocked EU’s Extraterritorial Data Acquisition May 29, 2026
Link to: 25 years IPRax – Conference in Regensburg Link to: 25 years IPRax – Conference in Regensburg 25 years IPRax – Conference in Regensburg Link to: Domestic Courts and Global Governance Link to: Domestic Courts and Global Governance Domestic Courts and Global Governance
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top