CASE OF BEELER v. SWITZERLAND
Hearing: B. v. Switzerland (no. 78630/12) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2021-06-16 00:00:00)
Application no.: 78630/12
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2022-10-11 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:1011JUD007863012
Respondent state: CHE
Articles of the Convention: 8;8-1;14;14+8-1;35;35-3-a;41;53;P1-1;P1-1-1
Represented by: LUGINBÜHL J.
Issue: Section 24 (2) of the Federal Law on old age and survivors’ insurance of 20 December 1946 ; Section 122 of the Federal Supreme Court Act of 17 June 2005
Strasbourg case-law cited: A, B and C v. Ireland [GC], no. 25579/05, § 281, ECHR 2010;Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali v. the United Kingdom, 28 May 1985, § 82, Series A no. 94;Airey v. Ireland, 9 October 1979, § 26, Series A no. 32;Aldeguer Tomás v. Spain, no. 35214/09, 14 June 2016;Andrle v. the Czech Republic, no. 6268/08, 17 February 2011;Bélané Nagy v. Hungary [GC], no. 53080/13, 13 December 2016;Bellet, Huertas and Vialatte v. France (dec.), nos. 40832/98 and 2 others, 27 April 1999;Belli and Arquier Martinez v. Switzerland, no. 65550/13, 11 December 2018;Biao v. Denmark [GC], no. 38590/10, 24 May 2016;Brauer v. Germany, no. 3545/04, 28 May 2009;Camp and Bourimi v. the Netherlands, no. 28369/95, ECHR 2000 X;Claes and Others v. Belgium, nos. 46825/99 and 6 others, § 53, 2 June 2005;Demir and Baykara v. Turkey [GC], no. 34503/97, §§ 57, 60 and 149, ECHR 2008;Dhahbi v. Italy, no. 17120/09, 8 April 2014;Di Trizio v. Switzerland, no. 7186/09, 2 February 2016;Fábián v. Hungary [GC], no. 78117/13, § 112, 5 September 2017;Fawsie v. Greece, no. 40080/07, 28 October 2010;Gaygusuz v. Austria, 16 September 1996, §§ 39 and 41, Reports 1996 IV;Gençel v. Turkey, no. 53431/99, § 27, 23 October 2003;Guberina v. Croatia, no. 23682/13, 22 March 2016;Hasani v. Croatia (dec.), no. 20844/09, 30 September 2010;Khamtokhu and Aksenchik v. Russia [GC], nos. 60367/08 and 961/11, 24 January 2017;Kjartan Ásmundsson v. Iceland, no. 60669/00, § 39, ECHR 2004 IX;Konstantin Markin v. Russia [GC], no. 30078/06, ECHR 2012;La Parola and Others v. Italy (dec.), no. 39712/98, 30 November 2000;Marckx v. Belgium, 13 June 1979, Series A no. 31;McDonald v. the United Kingdom, no. 4241/12, 20 May 2014;Merger and Cros v. France, no. 68864/01, § 46, 22 December 2004;Moskal v. Poland, no. 10373/05, 15 September 2009;Muñoz Díaz v. Spain, no. 49151/07, ECHR 2009;Neulinger and Shuruk v. Switzerland [GC], no. 41615/07, § 160, ECHR 2010;Niedzwiecki v. Germany, no. 58453/00, 25 October 2005;Okpisz v. Germany, no. 59140/00, 25 October 2005;Petrovic v. Austria, 27 March 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998 II;Pla and Puncernau v. Andorra, no. 69498/01, ECHR 2004 VIII;Şahin v. Germany [GC], no. 30943/96, § 85, ECHR 2003 VIII;Santos Hansen v. Denmark (dec.), no. 17949/07, 9 March 2010;Schaefer v. Germany (dec.), no. 14379/03, 4 September 2007;Şerife Yiğit v. Turkey [GC], no. 3976/05, 2 November 2010;Si Amer v. France, no. 29137/06, 29 October 2009;Skorkiewicz v. Poland (dec.), no. 39860/98, 1 June 1999;Stec and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 65731/01 and 65900/01, ECHR 2006 VI;Stec and Others v. the United Kingdom (dec.) [GC], nos. 65731/01 and 65900/01, § 39, ECHR 2005 X;Strand Lobben and Others v. Norway [GC], no. 37283/13, § 234, 10 September 2019;Šulcs and Others v. Latvia (dec.), no. 42923/10, 6 December 2011;Topčić Rosenberg v. Croatia, no. 19391/11, 14 November 2013;Ünal Tekeli v. Turkey, no. 29865/96, ECHR 2004 X (extracts);Vallianatos and Others v. Greece [GC], nos. 29381/09 and 32684/09, ECHR 2013 (extracts);Verein gegen Tierfabriken Schweiz (VgT) v. Switzerland (no. 2) [GC], no. 32772/02, § 88, ECHR 2009;Weller v. Hungary, no. 44399/05, 31 March 2009;Willis v. the United Kingdom, no. 36042/97, ECHR 2002 IV;X and Others v. Austria [GC], no. 19010/07, ECHR 2013;Yocheva and Ganeva v. Bulgaria, nos. 18592/15 and 43683/15, 11 May 2021
External sources: Article 2 (a) of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW);Recommendation no. R (85) 2 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe of 5 February 1985 on legal protection against sex discrimination
Conclusion: Preliminary objection dismissed (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Ratione materiae;Violation of Article 14+8-1 - Prohibition of discrimination (Article 14 - Discrimination) (Article 8-1 - Respect for family life;Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life);Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
Separate opinion: TRUE