We use cookies to enhance your user experience and analyze our traffic. See also our Privacy Policy.

Customize preferences

We respect your right to privacy. You can choose not to allow some types of cookies. Your cookie preferences will apply across our website.


Necessary

These cookies are required for the functionality of our website and cannot be switched off.

Analytics

We use these cookies to provide statistical information about our website - they are used for performance measurement and improvement. This help us improve the site by tracking which pages are most popular and how visitors move around.

EU Court Affirms Right to Correct Gender Registration without Proof of Surgery

EU Court Affirms Right to Correct Gender Registration without Proof of Surgery

On 13 March 2025, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled in case C-247/23 (Deldits) that individuals who are transgender have the right to have their gender marker corrected in official records without the need to prove they have undergone gender-affirming surgery. The court clarified that such a requirement would violate fundamental rights enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights.

The ruling involved a refugee recognized in Hungary, who had provided medical certificates confirming their male gender identity. However, despite these certificates, the Hungarian immigration database retained a female gender entry. The ECJ held that the GDPR’s right to correction (Article 16) obliges public authorities to amend such data upon request when incorrect—regardless of any surgical history. A medical certificate confirming the current gender identity suffices.

This decision represents a major advancement for transgender rights—and data protection— within the EU. By striking down invasive medical prerequisites, the ECJ reaffirmed the principle of self-determination, ensuring that the processing of sensitive personal data, including gender identity, remains respectful of individual privacy and dignity.

From a practical standpoint for both public agencies and private organizations, the ruling signals the end of outdated bureaucratic hurdles. Institutions handling identity or sensitive personal data must now accept non-invasive evidence, such as a qualified medical attestation, when individuals request data rectification. This aligns with the GDPR’s ethos of accuracy and fairness and removes burdensome requirements that previously amounted to discrimination.

References: