European Court of Human Rights Makes Another Attempt to Challenge the Institution of Marriage in Poland

Adobe Stock

• The European Court of Human Rights has upheld a complaint by a same-sex couple whose Polish registry office refused to register a marriage contracted in the United Kingdom. This is the fourth judgment in which the ECHR indicates that Poland has an obligation to ensure that same-sex couples can formalize their cohabitation.

• The Ordo Iuris Institute presented an amicus curiae (friend-of-the-court) opinion during the proceedings before the ECHR, emphasizing that the European Convention on Human Rights, when referring to family life, applies only to a community based on the union of a man and a woman.

• Under the current legal framework, the Convention requires Poland to implement the ECHR judgment; however, the Polish Constitution excludes the institutionalization of same-sex cohabitation.

The case concerned a same-sex couple who entered into a marriage in the United Kingdom and then attempted to register it in Poland. The head of the local civil registry office in Goszczyn refused the registration, arguing that recognizing a same-sex union as a marriage would contravene the fundamental principles of the Polish legal order. The decision of the civil registry office (USC) was upheld by the Mazovian governor and the Polish administrative courts.

In 2020, Bartholomew Kyle Andersen—one of the men in the relationship—filed a complaint against Poland with the European Court of Human Rights, alleging violations of his right to respect for private and family life (Article 8(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights).

The Ordo Iuris Institute joined the proceedings before the ECHR, submitting an amicus curiae opinion. In this opinion, Ordo Iuris argued that the Convention, when referring to family life, clearly contemplates only a union between a man and a woman. Therefore, a "right" to a redefined concept of family centered on a same-sex couple cannot be derived from the Convention. According to the Ordo Iuris Institute, member states should retain the freedom to decide how to regulate the legal status of same-sex cohabitation, and the European Court should not impose uniform solutions in this area.

On April 24, 2025, however, the Court ruled that Poland had violated Article 8 of the Convention by leaving the complainants in a "legal vacuum," due to its failure to "recognize and protect same-sex couples in stable and committed relationships." This marks the fourth ECHR ruling finding that Poland has violated Article 8 for failing to provide a legal framework for same-sex couples, following the Przybyszewska judgment of 2023, the Formela judgment of 2024, and the Szypuła judgment of 2025.

However, the registration—or general institutionalization—of same-sex cohabitation, including the creation of a legal mechanism for formalizing such relationships (whether by extending marriage to same-sex couples or introducing civil unions), would be incompatible with Article 18 of the Polish Constitution. This provision explicitly defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

ECHR Judgment of April 24, 2025: Andersen v. Poland

See also:
CJEU Advocate General Questions Member States’ Authority Over Marriage