THE BOTTOM LINE
- Simplified Cross-Border Mobility: Companies can now expect that employees in a same-sex marriage, legally contracted in one EU country, will have their marital status recognised for EU law purposes when they move to or return to a Member State that does not permit same-sex marriage. This secures rights related to residency and family life.
- Greater Legal Certainty for Talent: This ruling provides crucial legal certainty for mobile EU professionals and their families. Businesses hiring and relocating talent across the EU face reduced risk, as employees will not see their fundamental legal status erased when crossing a border.
- EU Rights Trump National Objections: The decision establishes a clear principle: a Member State’s refusal to recognise a civil status from another EU country cannot be justified by “public policy” or “national identity” if it obstructs a citizen’s fundamental right to free movement.
THE DETAILS
The case involved two Polish nationals who married legally in Germany while exercising their EU right to free movement. Upon seeking to return to Poland, they requested their German marriage certificate be transcribed into the Polish civil register—the standard procedure for recognising a foreign marriage. Polish authorities refused, citing national law and the constitutional definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman. This created a direct conflict between the fundamental EU right to move and reside freely with one’s family and a Member State’s sovereign control over family law.
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) sided firmly with the rights of the EU citizen. It reasoned that the freedom of movement is a cornerstone of EU citizenship, and this includes the right to return to one’s home country without having to forfeit the family life legally established in another Member State. The Court found that denying recognition of their marriage created a “serious inconvenience” and a significant obstacle to exercising this freedom, effectively penalising citizens for having moved within the Union.
Crucially, the Court clarified that this ruling does not compel Poland to legalise same-sex marriage within its own national legal system. The judgment is about recognition, not redefinition. Member States retain their competence over family law, but they must exercise it in compliance with EU law. Since Poland’s only effective mechanism for recognising a foreign marriage was the transcription of the certificate, it must make this procedure available to same-sex couples just as it does for opposite-sex couples. To deny this path constitutes discrimination based on sexual orientation, which is prohibited by the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.
SOURCE
Court of Justice of the European Union
