The Norwegian Anti-Discrimination and Equality Ombud found, in a decision of September 9 2014, that the current practice of requiring the F 64.0 transsexualism diagnosis and subsequent sterilization are discriminatory. Most people are assigned a legal gender at birth that corresponds with their gender identity, so such requirements puts transgender persons in a worse position than others. The Ministry of Health could provide no justification for this practice. These requirements are thus a form of indirect discrimination of transgender persons.
A woman consented to her female cohabitant undergoing medically assisted procreation (MAP) services with donor sperm performed in private. Before the birth of the child the couple married and the birthmother’s female partner then obtained legal recognition for her reassigned gender as a man. When the child subsequently was born, the birthmother’s (now) husband was registered as the father of the child in accordance with the rule on paternity presumption (he who is married to the birthmother is the father of the child).
The Appeals Court of Stockholm (Svea Court of Appeal) has recognized a judgment by Family Court of the State of Rhode Island, Providence, USA, according to which two Swedish men are the sole legal parents of a daughter born by a surrogate mother in the US.
On 2 December 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) delivered its judgment in the matter of A, B and C v the Netherlands. The Dutch Raad van State had asked for guidance on the limits that the Qualification Directive and the Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR) impose on the method of assessing the credibility of a declared sexual orientation.