Poland / Supreme Administrative Court / II OSK 2155/22

K. S. v Minister of the Interior and Administration
Deciding body type
National Court/Tribunal
Deciding body
Supreme Administrative Court
Type
Decision
Decision date
22/05/2025
  • Poland / Supreme Administrative Court / II OSK 2155/22

    Key facts of the case:

    On 28 April 2020, the Mayor of the City of Warsaw refused to issue an identity card to S.S.’s minor daughter. 

    On 19 June 2020, the Voivode of Mazowiecki upheld an appeal of this decision. The voivode’s justification of the decision was that under the provisions of the Act on Identity Cards it was impossible to enter two persons of the same sex as the parents of the holder of the above-mentioned document in the identity card.

    On 31 August 2021, the Minister annulled the decision of the Voivode and of the Mayor. The Minister ordered the identity card to be produced, but in a way in which only one of the mothers identified on the child’s Spanish birth certificate was listed and the father’s data was omitted. 

    The appellant did not agree with the Minister’s reasoning and filed an appeal against it.

    On 22 October 2021, the Minister of Internal Affairs and Administration upheld his own decision.

    On 11 April 2022, the first instance court dismissed the complaint of K.S. against the 22 October 2021 decision. The appellant lodged an appeal in cassation against the court’s judgment, alleging numerous violations of substantive law, among which Article 18 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, Articles8 and 14 of the ECHR, Article 3 of the Law on Civil Status Records, Article 12(1) of the Population Registration Act, and Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

    Key legal question raised by the court:

    The key legal question raised by the Court in this case regarded the scope of obligation of Poland to issue an identity card to a minor whose foreign birth certificate indicates as parents persons of the same sex.

    Outcome of the case:

    The Court found that while the appellant considered it important for the names of both mothers to be entered in the minor’s identity card, it considered the parenthood of those persons apparent from the birth certificate of the minor issued in another EU Member State (Spain). Therefore, the Court considered the identity card not necessary to establish the filial relationship. The Court further considered it irrelevant to refer a question for a preliminary ruling to the CJEU (as requested by the Commissioner for Human Rights, who participated in the proceeding), as the answer to the indicated issue had already been provided by the CJEU in its judgment of 24 June 2022, C-2/21. The Court also found that the issuance of an identity card with the name of only one of the parents does not constitute a form of discrimination against the child, neither violates the child's right to maintain identity or fails to protect the family. The Court lastly noted that an identity card does not serve as a civil status certificate and cannot replace it, and it also does not transcribe a foreign birth certificate.

    The Court therefore dismissed the cassation appeal as unfounded pursuant to Article 184 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter

    The appellant lodged a cassation appeal against the above judgment, challenging it in its entirety, alleging based on Article 174(1) of the Act of 30 August 2002. Law on Proceedings before Administrative Courts (Journal of Laws of 2022, item 329; hereinafter: p.p.s.a.) a violation of substantive law, i.e.:

    Article 21(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (Journal of Laws of 2004 No. 90, item 864/2, as amended; hereinafter: TFEU) and Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (Journal of Laws of 2007 No. 303, item 1; hereinafter: the CFP) by misinterpreting them and restricting the minor's right to respect for her family life and the right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States with each of her mothers by recognizing that it is possible to omit the data of one of the child's parents in the PESEL(Powszechny Elektroniczny System Ewidencji Ludności, or Universal Electronic System for Registration of the Population) register and the child's identity card. The latter would disproportionately hinder the use of this freedom due to the inconsistency of data concerning his/her identity in Poland and Spain and other EU countries - which led to the violation by the court of first instance of Article 145 § 1 point 1 letter a and Article 135 of the Code of Civil Procedure by not applying them.

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter (original language)

    Skargę kasacyjną od powyższego wyroku złożyła skarżąca, zaskarżając go w całości, zarzucając na podstawie art. 174 pkt 1 ustawy z 30 sierpnia 2002 r. Prawo o postępowaniu przed sądami administracyjnymi (Dz. U. z 2022 r. poz. 329; dalej: p.p.s.a.) naruszenie przepisów prawa materialnego, tj.:

    . . .

    art. 21 ust. 1 Traktatu o Funkcjonowaniu Unii Europejskiej (Dz. U. z 2004 r. nr 90 poz. 864/2 ze zm.; dalej: TFUE) i art. 7 Karty Praw Podstawowych Unii Europejskiej (Dz. U. UE C. z 2007 r. nr 303, poz. 1; dalej: KPP) poprzez ich błędną wykładnię i ograniczenie małoletniej prawa do poszanowania jej życia rodzinnego oraz prawa do swobodnego przemieszczania się i pobytu na terytorium państw członkowskich z każdą z jej matek poprzez uznanie, że w rejestrze PESEL oraz dowodzie osobistym dziecka możliwe jest pominięcie danych jednego z jej rodziców i nieproporcjonalne utrudnienie jej tym samym korzystania z tej swobody ze względu na niespójność danych dotyczących jej tożsamości w Polsce i w Hiszpanii oraz innych krajach UE - co doprowadziło do naruszenia przez sąd pierwszej instancji art. 145 § 1 pkt 1 lit. a oraz art. 135 p.p.s.a. poprzez ich niezastosowanie.