EU countries that have not legalised gay marriage must still offer same sex spouses the same residency rights as heterosexual couples under Brussels’ freedom of movement laws, the European Court of Justice has ruled.

In a landmark decision, EU judges decided that a country could not use the illegality of homosexual marriage as a reason to stop an EU citizen bringing their non-EU spouse to live with them, which is a right guaranteed by Brussels.

They stressed that the decision, which will set a precedent across the bloc, did not force EU members to recognise gay marriage in a bid to prevent accusation that the Luxembourg court was meddling in national affairs.

The judgement comes after an American man, Clai Hamilton, was denied residency in Romania with Adrian Coman, his Romanian husband, because gay marriage is illegal in that country. Instead he would only be allowed to stay in Romania for three months.

“Romanian citizens cannot be divided into good and gay. We can no longer be treated as inferior citizens without equal rights on the basis of the prejudices that some people have about homosexuality," Mr Coman said.

“Although the member states have the freedom whether or not to authorise marriage between persons of the same sex, they may not obstruct the freedom of residence of an EU citizen by refusing to grant his same-sex spouse, a national of a country that is not an EU Member State, a derived right of residence in their territory,” the EU’s highest court said in a statement on Tuesday.</s>Brussels: The European Union's (EU) top court on Tuesday ruled in favour of a Romanian gay man's right to have his American husband live with him in the country.

The country, which does not recognise same-sex marriage, had argued that the American was not entitled to the EU residency rights awarded to spouses, the BBC reported.

But the European Court of Justice (ECJ) said the term "spouse" was gender neutral.

Adrian Coman and his American partner Clai Hamilton were married in Brussels in 2010.

The ECJ ruled that member states should recognise gay marriages contracted in fellow EU states, and grant couples the same residency rights that other families enjoy.

"Although the member states have the freedom whether or not to authorise marriage between persons of the same sex, they may not obstruct the freedom of residence of an EU citizen by refusing to grant his same-sex spouse, a national of a country that is not an EU Member State, a derived right of residence in their territory", the court said.

Following the ruling, Conan said, "We are grateful to the EU Court and to the many people and institutions who have supported us, and through us, other same-sex couples in a similar situation. It is human dignity that wins today."

EU law permits a non-EU spouse of an EU citizen to join his or her spouse in the member state where the European national resides, reports the BBC.

Same-sex marriage is legal in these EU countries: Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom (excluding Northern Ireland) and Malta.</s>EU nations that have yet to legalise gay marriage will be forced to give same-sex couples the same residency rights as heterosexual partners - a European court has ruled.

The bloc's top court ruled on Tuesday that same-sex couples should be allowed to live in any EU member state - even in countries where same-sex marriage is still banned.

EU laws on freedom of movement extend to the non-European spouses of EU citizens and the European Court of Justice judgement means this also includes same-sex partners.

The decision, based on a case from Romania, risks further embittering relations between more socially tolerant member states to the west of the EU and conservative countries to the east.

In a case which has highlighted social differences between western Europe and a more conservative, ex-communist east, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that Romania must accept the validity of the mens' 2010 Belgian marriage and treat American Clai Hamilton as Adrian Coman's spouse under EU law.

The case did not touch on the freedom of member states to set their own matrimony laws, although campaigners have called on Brussels to push states to legalise same-sex marriage as a fundamental human right. Rather it upheld rights of EU citizens to move freely across the bloc along with their families.

'Although the member states have the freedom whether or not to authorise marriage between persons of the same sex,' the judges said, 'They may not obstruct the freedom of residence of an EU citizen by refusing to grant his same-sex spouse, a national of a country that is not an EU member state, a derived right of residence in their territory.'

The case arose because Hamilton's right as a non-EU citizen to live in Romania permanently was dependent on his status as Coman's spouse. Coman challenged a Romanian decision to limit Hamilton's residence to a three-month visa and a Romanian court referred the matter to the ECJ in Luxembourg.

Coman welcomed the ruling: 'We can now look in the eyes of any public official in Romania and across the EU with certainty that our relationship is equally valuable and equally relevant for the purpose of free movement within the EU,' he said.

The deputy leader of the liberal bloc in the European Parliament, Sophie in 't Veld, said: 'This is fantastic news and a landmark opinion for rainbow families.

'Freedom of movement is a right of all EU citizens. It cannot be restricted because of whom they love.'

The European Commission insisted that the ruling was not part of a push from Brussels to force social change in the bloc.

'Member states are in charge - but this is a useful clarification in terms of avoiding discrimination,' spokesman Margaritis Schinas told reporters when asked about opposition to same-sex marriage in parts of eastern Europe, where governments have also clashed with the EU executive over other civil rights.</s>The European Court of Justice has ruled that all European Union member states must recognise the residency rights of married same-sex couples.

The case involved Romanian activist Adrian Coman and his American husband Claibourn Robert Hamilton, who had been living in the United States for four years before marrying in Belgium in 2010.

When they tried to move to Romania a few years later, the country denied Hamilton spousal residency rights, as it does not recognise same-sex marriage. Officials argued that because Hamilton could not be classified as the spouse of an EU citizen in Romania, he was unable to have access to employment rights and healthcare benefits.

The Court of Justice took up the case in November 2016, after Romania’s Constitutional Court requested an interpretation of EU law.

It ruled that all EU countries must recognise same-sex marriage in relation to immigrations cases where one partner is a citizen of the bloc.

“Although the member states have the freedom whether or not to authorise marriage between persons of the same sex,” the judges said, “they may not obstruct the freedom of residence of an EU citizen by refusing to grant his same-sex spouse, a national of a country that is not an EU member state, a derived right of residence in their territory.”

The verdict was an important victory for LGBT rights groups, which have long argued that same-sex spouses of EU citizens should be afforded the same basic right to live and work across the bloc’s 28 countries as heterosexual spouses, regardless of individual countries’ stances on same-sex marriage.

Romania is one of six EU member states that don’t legally recognise same-sex marriage, along with Bulgaria, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, and Slovakia.

Coman said he had dreamed about this moment for a long time, adding: “I can barely believe it.”

Still, he said, he had been optimistic about the eventual verdict.

“Come on, it’s 2018, it’s one of the core freedoms of the EU,” he said. “But we didn’t expect it to take this long.”</s>The European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled on Tuesday that all member states must grant residency rights to same-sex spouses, regardless of whether or not such unions may legally be officiated in that country.

The decision has direct implications for Poland and six other countries in which same-sex marriage is not recognized by national law – and it is already drawing criticism from traditionalists and euroskeptics alike.

The case originated in Romania, where native Adrian Coman was fighting for residency rights for his American husband, Clai Hamilton. They had married in 2010 in Brussels, where Coman worked for the European parliament. However, like Poland, Romania does not recognize same-sex partnerships, and after being challenged in the Romanian constitutional court the case was referred to the ECJ.

According to European Union law, a non-EU citizen is allowed to reside in the same member state as their EU citizen spouse. This word “spouse” turned out to be key, as ultimately Europe’s highest court ruled that the term was gender neutral.

The decision narrowly affects residency rights – it does not touch the status quo of allowing EU member states to determine their marriage laws on an individual basis.

Nevertheless, some see it as an over-assertion of power by Brussels. Few countries are warier of this than Poland, which, along with Latvia and Hungary, sent representatives to a hearing Luxembourg last year to argue against the gay couple’s claim.

For his part, ECJ president Koen Lenaerts seemed not to disagree that this could be part of a larger push to unite the EU in recognizing same-sex marriage generally, calling the debate “exactly the same” as the one in the US. (In 2015, the US Supreme Court struck down several states’ same-sex marriage bans in a ruling against Ohio’s refusal to recognize a same-sex marriage performed in Maryland, essentially legalizing it everywhere.)

Whether or not the government of Poland – which remains relatively Catholic and conservative compared to most of the EU – decides to resist the ruling remains to be seen. It would not be the first time that Warsaw has bucked Brussels: Last year the government drew the ire of the European Commission for its highly controversial court reforms, and it defied an order by the ECJ to halt logging in the ancient Białowieża Forest on the pretense of “public safety.”

Furthermore, it is still possible for courts in Romania to appeal the verdict of this particular case, a process which could take up to two years.

LGBTQ activists, on the other hand, are celebrating the EU court’s decision as a watershed moment for their rights. Campaign Against Homophobia (Kampania Przeciw Homofobii), founded by Polish politician and gay icon Robert Biedroń, said that they look forward to the reaction of the government, calling the ruling evidence that “two million [LGBTQ] citizens cannot be ignored.”

There is a complex and inconsistent history of gay rights in Poland, where, exceptionally, homosexuality has never been criminalized. Now Poland joins Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, and Slovakia in prohibiting gay marriage. The 22 other EU member states recognize gay marriage and/or civil partnerships between same-sex couples.</s>The European Court of Justice ruled today that as far as the laws of free movement within the European Union are concerned, the term “spouse” includes married people of the same sex (pdf).

It is a victory for a US-Romanian couple who asked the EU’s top court to rule that gay married couples have the same rights to live in whatever country they want in the bloc as straight people, even if gay marriage is illegal in the EU member state they live in.

Romanian citizen Adrian Coman and American Clai Hamilton met in America in 2002 and married in Brussels in 2010. When Coman’s job at the European Parliament ended in 2012, he tried to register their marriage certificate with the Romanian consulate in Brussels, to claim residence rights for his husband and was denied.

The pair sued Romania, accusing it of violating EU laws that allow couples to live and work anywhere in the bloc. The case reached the ECJ in 2016.

The ECJ has the ultimate say and its rulings must be adopted by all member states. Currently, 22 out of 28 EU member states allow gay marriage and civil partnerships but the freedom of movement rights differed in countries where same-sex partnerships were not recognized.

The ruling will likely fan the flames of hatred towards Brussels not just in Romania, but among eurosceptic, right-wing governments in countries like Poland, Hungary and Latvia too, who argue that it’s up to national governments, not Brussels to decide how to define marriage.</s>Bermuda's Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Same-Sex Marriage — Again

The latest step in a circuitous legal journey allows same-sex couples in Bermuda to once again legally wed.

On Wednesday, Bermuda's Supreme Court struck down part of The Domestic Partnership Act — a law that had barred same-sex couples from marrying — saying it was unconstitutional.

This is the second time the Supreme Court has voted to legalize same-sex marriage; In May 2017 it ruled in favor of a Bermudian man and his Canadian partner who had challenged the rejection of their marriage application.

But less than a year later, Bermuda's lawmakers approved the Domestic Partnership Act.

In announcing the implementation of the law, the government said on its website that "the majority of Bermudians do not agree with same-sex marriage," adding that intent of the DPA was "to strike a fair balance between two currently irreconcilable groups in Bermuda, by restating that marriage must be between a male and a female while at the same time recognising and protecting the rights of same-sex couples."

But on Wednesday the Supreme Court said the government cannot "pass laws of general application which favour some beliefs at the expense of others."

Though the DPA was signed into law earlier this year, it had been in effect for less than a week, reports The Royal Gazette, having only become law last Friday. The newspaper reports that 14 same-sex marriages took place on the island, as well as six at sea on Bermuda-flagged ships, before the law went into effect.

And yet, the fate of same-sex marriage on the tiny British island territory, home to about 65,000 people, remains uncertain: The government could still appeal the ruling.

The Royal Gazette reports the chief justice agreed to stay the implementation of the judgment for six weeks until the government decides whether to appeal, during which time the current ban on same-sex marriage will remain in place.

Nevertheless, OUTBermuda, an LGBTQ advocacy group that had filed joint lawsuits with other plaintiffs in the case, celebrated Wednesday's ruling.

"Our hearts and hopes are full, thanks to this historic decision by our Supreme Court and its recognition that all Bermuda families matter," OUTBermuda said in a statement.

"Equality under the law is our birthright, and we begin by making every marriage equal."

Bermudian Roderick Ferguson was one of the plaintiffs in the case. He told Reuters it took him years to recover from the "internalised homophobia" of living on the island.

"Even though we have won, it may take five years or so for people to come to peace with it and maybe some never will," he said. "But if the law is on our side that helps."

Wednesday's decision comes a day after the highest court of the European Union ruled that all member countries must recognize same-sex marriage as it relates to residency rights for non-EU member spouses.

The European Court of Justice's decision ruled in favor of a Romanian man trying to get spousal residency rights for his American husband. Romania does not recognize same-sex marriage and the couple, who lives in the U.S., filed suit.

The New York Times reports six EU countries — all former Eastern Bloc nations — do not legally recognize same-sex marriages or civil unions. The EU court ruling does not alter individual countries' stance on same-sex marriage.</s>Prague, Czech Republic - A decision by the European Union's top court recognising the rights of same-sex marriage has been lauded by LGBT advocates as a landmark victory for equal rights, despite the fact it's still illegal in several member states.

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) on Tuesday ruled in favour of Adrian Coman, a Romanian gay man seeking the right to have his American husband live with him in Romania, even though it doesn't allow same-sex marriages.

As one of the most religious countries in the EU, Romania represents an eastern European bloc of nations that are more socially conservative than their western neighbours.

"We are thrilled not only because this confirms to Adrian that they are family and are entitled to protection, but because the ruling empowers all LGBT couples out there in the same situation," Romanita Iordache, who is on the legal team representing the couple and vice president of the LGBT advocacy group ACCEPT, told Al Jazeera.

"We are also thrilled because some still believe in the EU… This is about dignity and civil rights," she said.

The closely watched case came after Coman accused Romanian authorities of discrimination after they refused to grant his husband the right to residency there following their marriage in Brussels in 2010.

After the couple appealed to the Romanian Constitutional Court, it was referred to the ECJ in Luxembourg.

"Our family exists regardless of the law in Romania. We promised to take care of each other for the rest of our lives, like any other married couple," Coman told the court prior to the ruling.

"Our values do not differ from the values of other Romanian citizens and certainly do not differ from the values of European citizens."

While the court expressly stated in a release that member states maintain the freedom to authorise marriage between persons of the same sex, "they may not obstruct the freedom of residence of an EU citizen by refusing to grant his same-sex spouse a national of a country that is not an EU Member State, a derived right of residence in their territory".

It also clarified the word "spouse" is gender-neutral and therefore covers the same-sex spouse of an EU citizen.

"In our research, one of the key gaps in EU's legal migration schemes is the very narrow definition of who are the 'family members' that third country nationals can bring with them," Lina Vosyliute, a researcher in the justice and home affairs section of the Brussels-based Center for European Policy Studies.

"This judgement sets an important precedent that could add clarity and enable third country nationals, who come from outside the EU, to reunify with their same-sex spouses."

Even though homosexuality was decriminalised in Romania in 2001, a powerful Christian lobby has moved the country closer towards a referendum expected in the coming months that would define marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

"This type of marriage will remain banned and unrecognised in the future state of residence with the sole exception of the right of residence," spokesman of the Romanian patriarchate, Vasile Banescu, told local media following the decision. "The two were not given the right to live in Romania as spouses. They were given the right to live because they are husbands in an EU country, not us."

While most EU countries currently have marriage equality laws, and others have legalised civil unions with either equivalent or restricted rights, Romania has no such laws. They are joined by Poland, Slovakia, Lithuania, Latvia, and Bulgaria.

Several analysts said the binding decision by the ECJ could further fracture an already-delicate relationship between western and eastern Europe.

"In the current political climate, this decision is likely to weaken the ties between the new post-communist democracies and at least some of the west European member states," said Arch Puddington, a scholar for democracy studies at Freedom House, a US government-funded NGO that conducts research and advocacy on democracy.

"It will likely animate further anti-EU denunciations from [Hungarian Prime Minister] Viktor Orban and other critics, perhaps even some from populist parties in France, Italy, and elsewhere in the west.

"The decision may also be used as another bit of evidence by [Russian President Vladimir] Putin and his propagandists in their ongoing campaign to identify Europe as atheistic, anti-Christian, and prone to sexual radicalism," he said.

Others, meanwhile, are worried conservative member states may drag their feet in implementing the law, whether because of religious views or as a snub to Brussels.

"To be honest, some states may not comply with the judgments straight away given the strong stance against marriage equality. They will take their time," said Arpi Avetisyan, a litigation officer at LGBT advocate ILGA-Europe.

"On the other hand, they cannot prolong the process of complying with this process. It's hard to remark on the timeline, but we will be monitoring with our people on the ground."

With all 28 EU member states obliged to adopt the ruling, Coman said the ruling was a win for human dignity in Europe.

"We can now look in the eyes of any public official in Romania and across the EU with certainty that our relationship is equally valuable and equally relevant, for the purpose of free movement within the EU," he said.</s>Bucharest, Romania: All European Union countries must recognise same-sex marriage, at least in relation to immigration cases where one partner is a citizen of the bloc, its highest court ruled on Tuesday.

The verdict was an important victory for LGBT rights groups, which have long argued that same-sex spouses of EU citizens should be afforded the same basic right to live and work across the bloc's 28 countries as heterosexual spouses, regardless of individual countries' stances on same-sex marriage.

It also highlighted growing tensions between the bloc's core institutions and some of its newer, more socially conservative member states.

Six EU countries - all of them former Eastern Bloc nations that joined the union in the 21st century - have yet to legalise same-sex marriages or civil unions. In a statement issued along with its verdict, the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg said they remained free not to do so.

But, the court added: "They may not obstruct the freedom of residence of an EU citizen by refusing to grant his same-sex spouse, a national of a country that is not an EU member state, a derived right of residence in their territory."</s>LUXEMBOURG: Same-sex partners of EU citizens have the right to live in any member state whatever their nationality, the bloc's top court ruled on Tuesday (Jun 5), even in countries that do not recognise gay marriage.

EU laws on freedom of movement extend to the non-European spouses of EU citizens and the European Court of Justice judgement means this also includes same-sex partners.

The court recognised that EU member states "have the freedom whether or not to authorise marriage between persons of the same sex", the Luxembourg-based court said.

However, it added "they may not obstruct the freedom of residence of an EU citizen by refusing to grant his same-sex spouse, a national of a country that is not an EU member state, a derived right of residence in their territory."

The court was ruling in the case of Romanian man Relu Coman and his American husband Robert Hamilton, who were married in Brussels in 2010 and two years later sought to move to Romania.

The Romanian authorities refused to give Hamilton permission to live in the country for more than three months on the grounds that he could not be classified as Coman's spouse because the laws there do not recognise same-sex marriage.

The couple brought a case for discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, arguing that Coman's right to freedom of movement, guaranteed by EU law, had been curtailed by the restriction placed on his husband.

The case went to the Romanian Constitutional Court, which asked the ECJ whether under EU law Hamilton should be regarded as Coman's spouse.

"In the directive on the exercise of freedom of movement, the term 'spouse', which refers to a person joined to another person by the bonds of marriage, is gender-neutral and may therefore cover the same-sex spouse of an EU citizen," the ECJ said.

EU member states are free to decide whether or not to allow same-sex marriage in their own territories, the court said, but refusing to recognise a union lawfully made in another EU country "may interfere with the exercise of that citizen's right to move and reside freely".
The European Court of Justice rules that EU countries that have not legalised same-sex marriage must still offer same-sex spouses the same residency rights as heterosexual couples under freedom of movement laws.