CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 25 novembre 1994

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s65B66A85 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .s97EB40D9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s85F2E5C5 { width:30.44pt; display:inline-block } .s6863D229 { width:26pt; display:inline-block } .sBDAE81C4 { width:27.67pt; display:inline-block } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law November 1994 Stjerna v. Finlande - 18131/91 Judgment 25.11.1994 Article 8 Article 8-1 Respect for private life Refusal to grant request for a change of surname: no violation [This summary is extracted from the Court’s official reports (Series A or Reports of Judgments and Decisions). Its formatting and structure may therefore differ from the Case-Law Information Note summaries.] I.   ARTICLE 8 OF THE CONVENTION A.   Scope of the issues before the Court One of applicant's claims not raised before Commission and in any event unsubstantiated - Court's examination limited to facts of application as declared admissible by Commission. B.   Applicability Subject-matter of complaint (use of names) fell within ambit of Article   8. Conclusion : Article 8 applicable (unanimously). C.   Compliance Refusal to allow applicant to adopt specific new surname cannot necessarily be considered an "interference" in exercise of respect for private life, as would have been, for example, an obligation to change surname - however, there may in addition be positive obligations inherent in effective "respect" for private life. Legal restrictions on change of name may be justified in public interest - little common ground between domestic systems as to conditions on which change of name may be legally effected - may therefore be deduced that Contracting States enjoy wide margin of appreciation in this area. Instances of inconvenience complained of by applicant: not shown to be very frequent or any more significant than those experienced by large number of people in Europe today - in any event, national authorities in principle better placed to assess level of inconvenience and no sufficient grounds adduced to justify Court coming to conclusion different from theirs - therefore, sources of inconvenience not sufficient to raise issue of failure to respect private life under paragraph 1. Applicant's attachment to proposed name:   last ancestor who bore that name so far back in time (18th century) that no significant weight could be given to those links for purposes of paragraph 1 of Article 8. In addition, multitude of possibilities existed to take a name other than proposed name. In these circumstances refusal in issue did not constitute lack of respect for private life. Conclusion : no violation (unanimously). II.   ARTICLE 14 OF THE CONVENTION TAKEN TOGETHER WITH ARTICLE 8 References made in relevant decisions to fact that one of ancestors born out of wedlock did not appear to have had any bearing on impugned refusal - reason seemed rather to have been that proposed name had not been in established use within the family - justification was thus objective and reasonable. Conclusion : no violation (unanimously).   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes