Abstract

In its landmark Grand Chamber ruling in Fedotova v. Russia (2023), the European Court of Human Rights established for the first time in clear terms the existence of a positive obligation, within Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, requiring all State parties to afford samesex couples a legal framework for their recognition and protection – the ‘right to same-sex unions’. Following that judgment, four other similar cases concerning the lack of same-sex couple recognition in Romania, Ukraine, Bulgaria, and Poland have been swiftly decided. This article critically examines the trajectory of this case-law, analysing its application by the Court subsequent to Fedotova, its intricate interplays, and potential inconsistencies. Given that the right to same-sex unions was not initially envisaged within the Convention’s original framework, this study delves into its legal basis, content, purpose, possible exceptions, and potential implications. Through this exploration, the contribution seeks to offer insights into the evolving landscape of same-sex couple protection within the European Convention system