FIRST SECTION

Application no. 51166/10 by Josip HABULINEC and Anita FILIPOVIĆ against Croatia lodged on 9 August 2010

STATEMENT OF FACTS

THE FACTS

The applicants, Mr Josip Habulinec and Ms Anita Filipović , are Croatian nationals who were born in 1968 and 1972 respectively and live in Krapinske Toplice. They are represented before the Court by Ms I. Bojić, a lawyer practising in Zagreb .

A. The circumstances of the case

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows.

The applicants are cohabitees who have two children together, born in 2007 and 2008.

On 26 January 2010 the second applicant gave birth to A. who died a day later in Zabok General Hospital .

On 28 January 2010 the birth of A. was registered at the Zabok Register Office and the second applicant was registered as A. ’ s mother, while data about the child ’ s father were not registered.

In March 2010 the first applicant went to the Zabok Register Office asking to be registered as A. ’ s father but was told that it was not possible to recognise paternity of a deceased child.

On 2 July 2010 the applicants contacted the Zabok Register Office through their counsel seeking the registration of the first applicant ’ s paternity.

On 9 July 2010 the applicants ’ counsel was informed that the registration of the first applicant ’ s paternity was not possible since the child was deceased.

B. Relevant domestic law

Section 58 § 2 of the Family Act reads:

“Maternity and paternity cannot be recognised after the child ’ s death, save where a child has descendants.”

COMPLAINTS

The applicants complain under Article 8 of the Convention of the impossibility to register the first applicant as A. ’ s father.

Under Article 13 they complain that the have no remedy at their disposal for their Convention complaints.

Under Article 14 they complain that they have been discriminated against as parents of a child born out of wedlock.

QUESTION S TO THE PARTIES

1 . Has there been a violation of the applicants ’ right to respect for their private and family life, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention?

2 . Do the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy for their Convention complaints, as required by Article 13 of the Convention?

3 . Have the applicants suffered discrimination in the enjoyment of their Convention rights on the ground of their marital status, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention read in conjunction with Article 8?