He predicted that the findings expressed by ST would not be easy to implement in law. “Determining what an actual family is, where a lot of different situations are possible, is quite difficult, but it is a task that the legislator must now work on,” Levits commented.
–
He emphasized that the verdict handed down last week did not in any way infringe or change the concept of marriage, but spoke of the concept of family. “Marriage remains as defined in the Satversme – the union between a man and a woman, but in the opinion of ST the concept of family can be extended not only to a legally formed family, but also to an actual family, thus to actual cohabitation,” explained the first person.
–
The President commented that ST had taken the situation of the child as a starting point when making the judgment in the particular case. “A child is born in a certain situation, and his parents can be one or the other. In this case, ST considered that same-sex parents or people who make up a family are also families that need to be protected,” Levits explained, adding that such an attitude in the Latvian legal system has appeared for the first time.
–
As reported, ST last Thursday declared the norm of the law, which does not provide for the right to leave for same-sex couples after the birth of a child, to be inconsistent with the Satversme.
–
ST assessed a couple’s application when the child’s biological mother’s partner was not entitled to post-natal leave. In the present case the applicant requested to verify the compliance of Section 155, Paragraph one of the Labor Law with the first sentence of Section 110 of the Satversme.
— .
