X, Y, and Z v. United Kingdom

X (plaintiff) was a person who had been assigned the gender of woman at birth but who had transitioned to a man. For more than 20 years, X was in a permanent relationship with Y, who was a woman. The two applied to a medical institution to impregnate Y via artificial insemination. Although initially denied, X and Y appealed and were eventually successful. The two had a child, Z, and eventually had another child via the same process. X then sought to be registered as Z’s father. The minister of health of the United Kingdom (defendant) denied the registration of X as the father. The minister argued that only a biological man could be registered as a father. The minister also noted that notwithstanding this fact, Z could have X’s surname, and X could receive a tax allowance if X provided financial support to the child. X later passed on a job opportunity in another country because, given that he was not the registered father of Z, his family would not be eligible for certain benefits. X sued the United Kingdom, claiming that the denial of his registration to be the father violated Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Under Article 8, individuals generally had a right to respect for their family life unless governmental action was in accordance with law and necessary in a democratic society. The government responded with two arguments. First, the government argued that Article 8 was inapplicable because there was no family life at issue. Second, the government argued that the law on which the denial was based was justified.