PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 7971/07) 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 Bahar Leventoğlu Abdulkadiroğlu (“the applicant”), on 8 February 2007.

The applicant was represented by Mr B. Balpazarı, a lawyer practising in İzmir. 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 1972 and lives in İzmir.

Following her marriage to Atila Abdulkadiroğlu on 6 July 1996, the applicant, whose surname was “Leventoğlu” prior to her marriage, had to take her husband’s surname pursuant to Article 153 of the Turkish Civil Code. As she was known by her maiden name in her academic and professional life, she continued to use it; however, she could not use it in any official documents.

An amendment to Article 153 of the Civil Code on 14 May 1997 meant that married women acquired the right to put their maiden name in front of their husband’s surname. The applicant preferred not to make use of that option because, in her view, the amendment in question did not satisfy her request, which was to use her maiden name on its own.

Following the enactment of the new Civil Code on 22 November 2001, Article 187 was worded identically to the former Article 153 (see “Relevant domestic law and practice” below).

On 26 September 2005 the applicant brought proceedings before the İzmir Court of First Instance seeking permission to use only her maiden name, Leventoğlu.

On 6 December 2005 the court dismissed the applicant’s request on the grounds that, pursuant to Article 187 of the Civil Code, married women had to bear their husband’s name throughout their marriage and were not permitted to use their maiden name alone.

The applicant appealed against that judgment and on 21 March 2006 it was upheld by the Court of Cassation. A request by the applicant for the proceedings in her case to be reopened was further rejected by the same court on 14 July 2006. That decision was served on the applicant on 11 August 2006.