PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 26268/08) against the Republic of Turkey lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Turkish national, Ms Gülizar Tuncer Güneş (“the applicant”), on 16 May 2008.

The applicant was represented by Ms K. Doğru, lawyer practising in Istanbul. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

The applicant alleged, in particular, that the refusal by the domestic courts to allow her to bear only her maiden name unjustifiably interfered with her right to respect for her private life under Article 8 of the Convention. She claimed that the fact that Turkish law allowed married men but not married women to bear their own surname after marriage constituted discrimination on grounds of sex and was incompatible with Article 14 of the Convention.

On 22 October 2010 the application was communicated to the Government. It was also decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the application at the same time (Article 29 § 1).

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

The applicant was born in 1966 and lives in Istanbul.

On 30 March 2005 the applicant, who is a lawyer, got married and took her husband’s surname pursuant to Article 187 of the Turkish Civil Code. She, however, kept her maiden name in front of her husband’s surname as provided for by the same provision.

On 9 May 2007 the applicant brought proceedings before the Şişli Court of First Instance for permission to use only her maiden name, “Tuncer”.

On 18 July 2007 the Şişli Court of First Instance dismissed the applicant’s request on the ground that, under Article 187 of the Turkish Civil Code, married women had to bear their husband’s name throughout their marriage and were not entitled to use their maiden name alone.

The applicant appealed. On 22 November 2007 the Court of Cassation upheld the judgment.