Suchergebnisse

The article analyses recent trends in permitting and recognizing same-sex marriages and partnerships in Europe. The main purpose of the paper is to carry out a legal analysis and to identify the extent to which recognition of same-sex couples is reˆected in the evolving case law of the ECtHR and the CJEU, as well as national constitutional or supreme courts. The paper is structured into two parts. The first part discusses whether European countries are obliged to introduce same-sex marriages or partnerships in their national law. For this purpose, the author examines the EU Member States' commitments set by the Council of Europe and the EU as stated in law and as interpreted by the ECtHR and the CJEU. Then, the focus is shiqed to the national constitutional jurisprudence (including Italian, Spanish, Portuguese and Austrian courts). Interplay between judicial and legislative powers when fostering recognition of family relations of same-sex couples is highlighted. In the second part, a considerable attention is given to the question of legal recognition of same-sex marriages and partnerships concluded abroad. Again, the case law of the ECtHR and the CJEU is scrutinised. Later, the author turns her attention to recent decisions of Romanian and Lithuanian constitutional courts where migration rights (residence rights) of same-sex spouses were at stake. The author notes that both courts have coherently followed the CJEU ruling in Coman case and have both confirrmed (even though modestly) the need for a more extensive recognition of same sex relations beyond mere residence rights.

The article analyses recent trends in permitting and recognizing same-sex marriages and partnerships in Europe. The main purpose of the paper is to carry out a legal analysis and to identify the extent to which recognition of same-sex couples is reˆected in the evolving case law of the ECtHR and the CJEU, as well as national constitutional or supreme courts. The paper is structured into two parts. The first part discusses whether European countries are obliged to introduce same-sex marriages or partnerships in their national law. For this purpose, the author examines the EU Member States' commitments set by the Council of Europe and the EU as stated in law and as interpreted by the ECtHR and the CJEU. Then, the focus is shiqed to the national constitutional jurisprudence (including Italian, Spanish, Portuguese and Austrian courts). Interplay between judicial and legislative powers when fostering recognition of family relations of same-sex couples is highlighted. In the second part, a considerable attention is given to the question of legal recognition of same-sex marriages and partnerships concluded abroad. Again, the case law of the ECtHR and the CJEU is scrutinised. Later, the author turns her attention to recent decisions of Romanian and Lithuanian constitutional courts where migration rights (residence rights) of same-sex spouses were at stake. The author notes that both courts have coherently followed the CJEU ruling in Coman case and have both confirrmed (even though modestly) the need for a more extensive recognition of same sex relations beyond mere residence rights.

The article analyses recent trends in permitting and recognizing same-sex marriages and partnerships in Europe. The main purpose of the paper is to carry out a legal analysis and to identify the extent to which recognition of same-sex couples is reˆected in the evolving case law of the ECtHR and the CJEU, as well as national constitutional or supreme courts. The paper is structured into two parts. The first part discusses whether European countries are obliged to introduce same-sex marriages or partnerships in their national law. For this purpose, the author examines the EU Member States' commitments set by the Council of Europe and the EU as stated in law and as interpreted by the ECtHR and the CJEU. Then, the focus is shiqed to the national constitutional jurisprudence (including Italian, Spanish, Portuguese and Austrian courts). Interplay between judicial and legislative powers when fostering recognition of family relations of same-sex couples is highlighted. In the second part, a considerable attention is given to the question of legal recognition of same-sex marriages and partnerships concluded abroad. Again, the case law of the ECtHR and the CJEU is scrutinised. Later, the author turns her attention to recent decisions of Romanian and Lithuanian constitutional courts where migration rights (residence rights) of same-sex spouses were at stake. The author notes that both courts have coherently followed the CJEU ruling in Coman case and have both confirrmed (even though modestly) the need for a more extensive recognition of same sex relations beyond mere residence rights.

The article analyses recent trends in permitting and recognizing same-sex marriages and partnerships in Europe. The main purpose of the paper is to carry out a legal analysis and to identify the extent to which recognition of same-sex couples is reˆected in the evolving case law of the ECtHR and the CJEU, as well as national constitutional or supreme courts. The paper is structured into two parts. The first part discusses whether European countries are obliged to introduce same-sex marriages or partnerships in their national law. For this purpose, the author examines the EU Member States' commitments set by the Council of Europe and the EU as stated in law and as interpreted by the ECtHR and the CJEU. Then, the focus is shiqed to the national constitutional jurisprudence (including Italian, Spanish, Portuguese and Austrian courts). Interplay between judicial and legislative powers when fostering recognition of family relations of same-sex couples is highlighted. In the second part, a considerable attention is given to the question of legal recognition of same-sex marriages and partnerships concluded abroad. Again, the case law of the ECtHR and the CJEU is scrutinised. Later, the author turns her attention to recent decisions of Romanian and Lithuanian constitutional courts where migration rights (residence rights) of same-sex spouses were at stake. The author notes that both courts have coherently followed the CJEU ruling in Coman case and have both confirrmed (even though modestly) the need for a more extensive recognition of same sex relations beyond mere residence rights.

The notion of "marriage" has been growing wider during the last decade and an increasing number of member states of the European Union (EU) has made or is in the process of making it available to same-sex partners. Considering the different notions of 'marriage' in member states and the crucial effects of nonrecognition, the EU is addressed with the task of providing some kind of a solution. Although some legislative proposals have already been adopted or pending, the situation still largely resembles a legal 'jungle'. The paper concentrates on the developments at the EU level that are related to cross-border recognition of same-sex marriages originating from within the EU. First, it analyzes the applicability of the relevant EU Regulations on jurisdiction, recognition and applicable law to same-sex marriages. Then the author focuses on the recent case practice of the CJEU to assess whether non-recognition of same-sex marriages in Lithuania may constitute discrimination under the relevant EU law. The third part of the paper is aimed at the analysis on the concept of the EU citizenship and its applicability to same-sex marriage recognition. Finally, the proposals of the European Commission on free movement of public documents and recognition of the effects of civil status records are analyzed and evaluated.

The notion of "marriage" has been growing wider during the last decade and an increasing number of member states of the European Union (EU) has made or is in the process of making it available to same-sex partners. Considering the different notions of 'marriage' in member states and the crucial effects of nonrecognition, the EU is addressed with the task of providing some kind of a solution. Although some legislative proposals have already been adopted or pending, the situation still largely resembles a legal 'jungle'. The paper concentrates on the developments at the EU level that are related to cross-border recognition of same-sex marriages originating from within the EU. First, it analyzes the applicability of the relevant EU Regulations on jurisdiction, recognition and applicable law to same-sex marriages. Then the author focuses on the recent case practice of the CJEU to assess whether non-recognition of same-sex marriages in Lithuania may constitute discrimination under the relevant EU law. The third part of the paper is aimed at the analysis on the concept of the EU citizenship and its applicability to same-sex marriage recognition. Finally, the proposals of the European Commission on free movement of public documents and recognition of the effects of civil status records are analyzed and evaluated.

The work was made by Gleb Šuklin, Political sociology master's degree student of VPU Social sciences faculty Sociology and political sciences department. Hypotheses of an investigation: 1. Different social evaluations of the sexes still dominate in modern society, but the new generation pay less and less attention to stereotypes; 2. Communal movement is a great assumption for minifying the stereotypes – many respondents think like this. Society as the institution is empowered to negate settled sexes' stereotypes, many of which earlier or later should disappear. 3. Respondents think that a very big influence in forming stereotypes has mass media, the education atmosphere. Settled stereotypes largely are the outcomes of the education and living atmosphere. The object of the investigation is civil society and its correlations with social evaluation of the sexes' stereotypes. The problem of the investigation: is the energisation of the civil society for eliminating evaluation of the sexes' stereotypes The purpose of the investigation is to disclose some civil society's and sexes' evaluation tendencies in nowadays context. Tasks of the investigation: 1. To analyze the conception of the stereotypes and role in the society; 2. To define the conception of the society and the importance of the society members in its life. 3. To fulfill the investigation that would let to ascertain the position of the society members' about the questions of sexes' stereotypes and evaluation.

The work was made by Gleb Šuklin, Political sociology master's degree student of VPU Social sciences faculty Sociology and political sciences department. Hypotheses of an investigation: 1. Different social evaluations of the sexes still dominate in modern society, but the new generation pay less and less attention to stereotypes; 2. Communal movement is a great assumption for minifying the stereotypes – many respondents think like this. Society as the institution is empowered to negate settled sexes' stereotypes, many of which earlier or later should disappear. 3. Respondents think that a very big influence in forming stereotypes has mass media, the education atmosphere. Settled stereotypes largely are the outcomes of the education and living atmosphere. The object of the investigation is civil society and its correlations with social evaluation of the sexes' stereotypes. The problem of the investigation: is the energisation of the civil society for eliminating evaluation of the sexes' stereotypes The purpose of the investigation is to disclose some civil society's and sexes' evaluation tendencies in nowadays context. Tasks of the investigation: 1. To analyze the conception of the stereotypes and role in the society; 2. To define the conception of the society and the importance of the society members in its life. 3. To fulfill the investigation that would let to ascertain the position of the society members' about the questions of sexes' stereotypes and evaluation.

Aspects of the Legal Recognition of Same-Sex Partnerships and Opposite-Sex Partnerships under the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and their influence on the Law of the Republic of Lithuania. One of the most important problem during last decades is the recognition of civil partnership. While changing public attitudes is the only thing that matter it also influences the law. In many European countries partnership is recognized as a form that is very similar to marriage. In Lithuania on the basis of the law partnership has no legal power that is why the question is does the fact of same-sex and different-sex partnership is acceptable, despite the fact this institute has no legal power. The European Court of Human Rights, according to its decisions, helps us to see the evolution of the interpretation of the norms of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. According to changing public relations, norms are interpreted more favorably despite the fact legislation has not changed. The main aspect of having different - sex partnership is the treatment as a normal family and guarantee to have same law as married persons have. Analyzing cases with different – sex partnership, we can see, that there is no problem to accept the fact of heterosexual partnership. It was harder to recognize when people who are in the registered partnership can be treated as a real family. The regulation of the same – sex relationships shows more problematic aspects, but they are all based on the fact of discrimination. As the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms does not contain an imperative fact, the interpretation of the European Court of Human Rights was influenced by prevailing public relations. Over time, homogeneous couples have not only won the right to have same – sex relationships, but also to have opportunity to establish a partnership or even a marriage. Since 2001 the Civil Code permits possibility of establishing partnerships. On the other hand this institute still has not have legal power. These legislations would allow people of different sexes to register their partnership. The fundamental problem with this institute's inaction is that the state of Lithuania is not yet fully prepared to accept same – sex relationship. In order to have partnership institute in Lithuania the government must do some actions to stop the discrimination against homosexual couples and adopt legislations to protect their rights eligibly.

Aspects of the Legal Recognition of Same-Sex Partnerships and Opposite-Sex Partnerships under the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and their influence on the Law of the Republic of Lithuania. One of the most important problem during last decades is the recognition of civil partnership. While changing public attitudes is the only thing that matter it also influences the law. In many European countries partnership is recognized as a form that is very similar to marriage. In Lithuania on the basis of the law partnership has no legal power that is why the question is does the fact of same-sex and different-sex partnership is acceptable, despite the fact this institute has no legal power. The European Court of Human Rights, according to its decisions, helps us to see the evolution of the interpretation of the norms of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. According to changing public relations, norms are interpreted more favorably despite the fact legislation has not changed. The main aspect of having different - sex partnership is the treatment as a normal family and guarantee to have same law as married persons have. Analyzing cases with different – sex partnership, we can see, that there is no problem to accept the fact of heterosexual partnership. It was harder to recognize when people who are in the registered partnership can be treated as a real family. The regulation of the same – sex relationships shows more problematic aspects, but they are all based on the fact of discrimination. As the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms does not contain an imperative fact, the interpretation of the European Court of Human Rights was influenced by prevailing public relations. Over time, homogeneous couples have not only won the right to have same – sex relationships, but also to have opportunity to establish a partnership or even a marriage. Since 2001 the Civil Code permits possibility of establishing partnerships. On the other hand this institute still has not have legal power. These legislations would allow people of different sexes to register their partnership. The fundamental problem with this institute's inaction is that the state of Lithuania is not yet fully prepared to accept same – sex relationship. In order to have partnership institute in Lithuania the government must do some actions to stop the discrimination against homosexual couples and adopt legislations to protect their rights eligibly.

Aspects of the Legal Recognition of Same-Sex Partnerships and Opposite-Sex Partnerships under the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and their influence on the Law of the Republic of Lithuania. One of the most important problem during last decades is the recognition of civil partnership. While changing public attitudes is the only thing that matter it also influences the law. In many European countries partnership is recognized as a form that is very similar to marriage. In Lithuania on the basis of the law partnership has no legal power that is why the question is does the fact of same-sex and different-sex partnership is acceptable, despite the fact this institute has no legal power. The European Court of Human Rights, according to its decisions, helps us to see the evolution of the interpretation of the norms of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. According to changing public relations, norms are interpreted more favorably despite the fact legislation has not changed. The main aspect of having different - sex partnership is the treatment as a normal family and guarantee to have same law as married persons have. Analyzing cases with different – sex partnership, we can see, that there is no problem to accept the fact of heterosexual partnership. It was harder to recognize when people who are in the registered partnership can be treated as a real family. The regulation of the same – sex relationships shows more problematic aspects, but they are all based on the fact of discrimination. As the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms does not contain an imperative fact, the interpretation of the European Court of Human Rights was influenced by prevailing public relations. Over time, homogeneous couples have not only won the right to have same – sex relationships, but also to have opportunity to establish a partnership or even a marriage. Since 2001 the Civil Code permits possibility of establishing partnerships. On the other hand this institute still has not have legal power. These legislations would allow people of different sexes to register their partnership. The fundamental problem with this institute's inaction is that the state of Lithuania is not yet fully prepared to accept same – sex relationship. In order to have partnership institute in Lithuania the government must do some actions to stop the discrimination against homosexual couples and adopt legislations to protect their rights eligibly.

Aspects of the Legal Recognition of Same-Sex Partnerships and Opposite-Sex Partnerships under the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and their influence on the Law of the Republic of Lithuania. One of the most important problem during last decades is the recognition of civil partnership. While changing public attitudes is the only thing that matter it also influences the law. In many European countries partnership is recognized as a form that is very similar to marriage. In Lithuania on the basis of the law partnership has no legal power that is why the question is does the fact of same-sex and different-sex partnership is acceptable, despite the fact this institute has no legal power. The European Court of Human Rights, according to its decisions, helps us to see the evolution of the interpretation of the norms of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. According to changing public relations, norms are interpreted more favorably despite the fact legislation has not changed. The main aspect of having different - sex partnership is the treatment as a normal family and guarantee to have same law as married persons have. Analyzing cases with different – sex partnership, we can see, that there is no problem to accept the fact of heterosexual partnership. It was harder to recognize when people who are in the registered partnership can be treated as a real family. The regulation of the same – sex relationships shows more problematic aspects, but they are all based on the fact of discrimination. As the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms does not contain an imperative fact, the interpretation of the European Court of Human Rights was influenced by prevailing public relations. Over time, homogeneous couples have not only won the right to have same – sex relationships, but also to have opportunity to establish a partnership or even a marriage. Since 2001 the Civil Code permits possibility of establishing partnerships. On the other hand this institute still has not have legal power. These legislations would allow people of different sexes to register their partnership. The fundamental problem with this institute's inaction is that the state of Lithuania is not yet fully prepared to accept same – sex relationship. In order to have partnership institute in Lithuania the government must do some actions to stop the discrimination against homosexual couples and adopt legislations to protect their rights eligibly.

The institute of marriage annulment is not new basis regarding the end of legal relations between spouses. Marriage annulment was first mentioned in Lithuanian historical sources in 16th century. The grounds and procedures for declaring Marriage Null and Void are provided in the Article 3.37 of the Civil Code of Lithuanian Republic. In this work by the help of systematic method there is developed the substance of marriage annulment and its distinguishing points extracting this institute from the others institutes declaring the end of legal relations between spouses. This institute is being determined as the rejection of the country to accept and guard the alliance of spouses and to acclaim such alliance as marriage. Different grounds of marriage annulment are being analysed by the help of comparative method. Marrying a foreigners and getting married in the foreign countries becomes more and more popular nowadays. But also with this, the institute of marriage annulment becomes more applicable in practice. In this work we analyse international conventions, agreements and other international documents regarding acknowledgement of the court ruling. The special place in this work is set for European Union Law concerning marriage annulment, especially the new Brussels II (Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility for the children of both spouses).

The institute of marriage annulment is not new basis regarding the end of legal relations between spouses. Marriage annulment was first mentioned in Lithuanian historical sources in 16th century. The grounds and procedures for declaring Marriage Null and Void are provided in the Article 3.37 of the Civil Code of Lithuanian Republic. In this work by the help of systematic method there is developed the substance of marriage annulment and its distinguishing points extracting this institute from the others institutes declaring the end of legal relations between spouses. This institute is being determined as the rejection of the country to accept and guard the alliance of spouses and to acclaim such alliance as marriage. Different grounds of marriage annulment are being analysed by the help of comparative method. Marrying a foreigners and getting married in the foreign countries becomes more and more popular nowadays. But also with this, the institute of marriage annulment becomes more applicable in practice. In this work we analyse international conventions, agreements and other international documents regarding acknowledgement of the court ruling. The special place in this work is set for European Union Law concerning marriage annulment, especially the new Brussels II (Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility for the children of both spouses).

Referendum processes in the six post-communist countries – Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine – have been analyzed. Classification of the referenda into categories, such as plebiscites, constitutional referenda, ratification referenda, and that of ratification, of political routine, has been proposed. Separatist referenda organized in the Republic of South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Nagorno-Karabakh and Transnistria have not been recognized by international community. In the two cases, Azerbaijan and Belarus, referenda were used for a for constitutional amendments consolidating authoritarian regimes. Formal attribution of them to the simply "constitutional" would be inadequate; they rather should be categorized as sub-type of "Asian" referenda. Renewing traditional "transitional" logic, civilization theoretic approach, concept of "bridging civilization spaces" has been utilized in order to more adequate perception of processes within East European space.