Three recent admissibility decisions
The European Court of Human Rights has recently declared three complaints about sexual orientation discrimination inadmissible:
M.B. v the Netherlands
The applicant complained, inter alia, under Article 3 of the Convention that his return to Guinea would mean he would run a real risk of ill-treatment due to his sexual orientation.
I.K. v Switzerland
The applicant complained that he will be subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment if he returns to Sierra Leone because of his sexual orientation, and would be exposed to discrimination on the grounds of his sexual orientation. He invoked Articles 3 and 14 of the Convention.
Hallier and Others v France
The applicants complain of the rejection of an application for paternity leave, maintaining that the refusal was based on discrimination based on sex and sexual orientation in violation of Article 14 taken in conjunction with Article 8 of the Convention.
M.B. v the Netherlands
The applicant complained, inter alia, under Article 3 of the Convention that his return to Guinea would mean he would run a real risk of ill-treatment due to his sexual orientation.
I.K. v Switzerland
The applicant complained that he will be subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment if he returns to Sierra Leone because of his sexual orientation, and would be exposed to discrimination on the grounds of his sexual orientation. He invoked Articles 3 and 14 of the Convention.
Hallier and Others v France
The applicants complain of the rejection of an application for paternity leave, maintaining that the refusal was based on discrimination based on sex and sexual orientation in violation of Article 14 taken in conjunction with Article 8 of the Convention.
Comments
Post a Comment