The Regional Court in Banská Bystrica has to rule again in a case concerning gender reassignment

The Regional Court in Banská Bystrica upheld this conclusion of the registry office in its judgment, however, without more detailed reasoning. However, the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic did not share such a legal opinion of the public administration body or the regional court. Although the plaintiff did not attach to her application for a change of sex addressed to the registry office proof of a surgical change of sex (since she had not undergone such a change at that time), on the other hand, the Court of Cassation, in its decision in the present case, concluded that the generally binding legislation of the Slovak Republic at the relevant time did not specify what documents are required to prove a change of sex in the applicant for the purpose of making changes in the registry office, or, as the case may be, for the purposes of the application, for the purposes of making changes in the registry office, for the purposes of the application for a change of sex what such a certificate should contain, who should issue it, nor that the proof of a change of sex should be exclusively a surgical procedure, etc. However, the Regional Court did not address these issues in detail and, in fact, merely accepted the defendant’s reasoning without further consideration.

The Court of Cassation did not accept the legal opinion of the Regional Court, which strictly insisted on the requirement of a surgical procedure under the above-mentioned conditions. The Supreme Administrative Court also referred to the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights in such or similar cases.

In further proceedings, it will therefore be the task of the Regional Court to carefully reassess and properly justify the legal question at the issue, taking into account that the generally binding legislation of the Slovak Republic does not explicitly state in any provision that a surgical procedure (castration) is necessary for the public acceptance of gender reassignment, nor does it contain a detailed regulation concerning the medical certificate on the basis of which such a change is to be made in the register. The Regional Court will also be obliged to take into account the case-law of the ECHR, which has already dealt with similar issues in its case-law.

In this case, the Panel 4S of the Supreme Administrative Court ruled unanimously in the following composition: the President of the Panel prof. JUDr. PhDr. Peter Potásch, PhD and the Judges JUDr. Monika Valašiková, PhD. and JUDr. Anita Filová.