Key facts of the case:
The applicant, having concluded a registered partnership with another woman required the health insurance Fund the benefit of an indemnity of paternity leave, after her partner gave birth to the baby. This indemnity has been refused. The applicant alleges a discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender.
Results (sanctions) and key consequences of the case:
The Court states that there is no discrimination because the Code of Social Security requires a line of filiation between the father and the child. This filiation doesn't exist in this case.