März Julian W
Institute of Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine (IBME), University of Zurich (UZH) Zurich Switzerland.
Eur J Health Law. 2021 May 10;28(3):263-280. doi: 10.1163/15718093-BJA10045.
There is little consensus between European States regarding the legal treatment of surrogacy in general and of transnational commercial surrogacy in particular. Against this background, the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in this matter is of particular significance since it provides some common ground for the legal treatment of transnational commercial surrogacy in Europe. For this reason, the present paper will outline the development of the jurisprudence of the ECtHR on transnational commercial surrogacy, giving particular attention to the Mennesson and Labassee decisions, the Paradiso/Campanelli case, and the 2019 Advisory Opinion. On this basis, it will conclude by underlining the importance of the best interests of the child principle in the jurisprudence of the ECtHR on transnational commercial surrogacy.
欧洲各国在代孕的法律处理，尤其是跨国商业代孕的法律处理方面，几乎没有达成共识。在此背景下，欧洲人权法院（ECtHR）在此问题上的判例具有特别重要的意义，因为它为欧洲跨国商业代孕的法律处理提供了一些共同基础。因此，本文将概述欧洲人权法院关于跨国商业代孕的判例发展，特别关注梅内松案和拉巴西案的判决、帕拉迪索/坎帕内利案以及2019年的咨询意见。在此基础上，本文将强调儿童最大利益原则在欧洲人权法院关于跨国商业代孕的判例中的重要性，并以此作为结论。
