| Applicant name | Van Oosterwijck |
| Applicant type | Natural person |
| Country | Belgium |
| Decision no. | 7654/76 |
| Date | 09/05/1978 |
| Judges | – |
| Institution | Commission |
| Type | Decision |
| Outcome Art. 8 | Admissible |
| Reason | – |
| Type of privacy | Bodily privacy |
| Keywords | Transgender; exhaustion domestic remedies |
| Facts of the case | Applicant was born a women but underwent several gender reassignment surgeries. He wants the Belgian authorities to change his gender is the official records, his documents, etc., but they refuse to do so. |
| Analysis | The applicant did not exhaust all domestic remedies, but didn’t need to do so because there was a precedent from which it could be distilled that those remedies would be fruitless. The fact that he did not cite the ECHR in the domestic procedures also does not mean that his applicantion cannot be declared admissible. The applicant invokes Article 3, 8 and 12 and the Commission declares admissible the claims as to the latter two provisions, in particular lying emphasis on Article 8 ECHR. |
| Documents | Decision |