Recognition of same-sex unions in Poland

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Poland does not legally recognize same-sex unions, either in the form of marriage or civil unions. In 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples have limited legal rights in regards to the tenancy of a shared household. A few laws also guarantee certain limited rights for unmarried couples, including couples of the same sex. Same-sex spouses also have access to residency rights under EU law.

Article 18 of the Polish Constitution,[1] adopted in 1997, is widely interpreted as banning same-sex marriage,[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] and several legal challenges have been filed over the years to test the wording of the article.

Unregistered cohabitation[edit]

While Poland does not have a specific law on cohabitation, there are some provisions in various legal acts or Supreme Court rulings that recognise relations between unmarried partners and grant them specific rights and obligations. For example, Article 115(11) of the Penal Code (Polish: Kodeks karny) uses the term "the closest person", which covers romantic relations that are not legally formalised. The status of "the closest person" gives the right of refusal to testify against the partner. The term "partner" is not explicitly defined. A March 2016 landmark decision of the Supreme Court regarding the rights of same-sex partners confirmed that the wording also includes same-sex partners.[12]

Laws regarding same-sex partnerships in Europe¹
  Civil union
  Limited domestic recognition (cohabitation)
  Limited foreign recognition (residency rights)
  Constitution limits marriage to opposite-sex couples
¹ May include recent laws or court decisions that have not yet entered into effect.

Other laws also provide limited recognition for same-sex couples. For instance, since 2004, when one partner is entitled to social benefits, the income of the other partner is also taken into consideration. Under Article 6.14 of the Social Aid Act of 12 March 2004 (Polish: Ustawa z dnia 12 marca 2004 r. o pomocy społecznej), entitlement to social benefits is dependent on the income per person in a family. The term "family" is used in the act to refer to people who are married, in a de facto partnership, living together and have a common household. Since 2008, if one partner suffers an accident or is seriously ill, the other partner is considered as a next of kin for medical purposes. Under Article 3.1(2) of the Patients' Rights Act of 6 November 2008 (Polish: Ustawa z dina 6 listopada 2008 r. o prawach pacjenta i Rzeczniku Praw Pacjenta), the definition of "next of kin" (Polish: osoba bliska) includes a "person in a durable partnership" (Polish: osoba wtrwałym pożyciu).[13][14][15][16][17][18]

A resolution of the Supreme Court from 28 November 2012 (III CZP 65/12) on the interpretation of the term "a person who has lived actually in cohabitation with the tenant" was issued with regard to the case of a gay man who was the partner of a deceased person, the main tenant of the apartment. The Court interpreted the law in a way that recognised the surviving partner as authorised to take over the right to tenancy. The Court stated that the person actually remaining in cohabitation with the tenant - in the meaning of Article 691 § 1 of the Civil Code - is a person connected with the tenant by a bond of emotional, physical and economic nature. This also includes a person of the same sex.[19][20] Previously, in March 2010, the European Court of Human Rights ruled, in the case of Kozak v. Poland, that LGBT people have the right to inherit from their partners.[21]

In one case in 2011, a Polish writer, Izabela Filipiak, managed to get a residency card for her American partner.[22]

In 2018, a lesbian couple was granted the right to register their British-born son as their own.[23][24]

Limited symbolic recognition[edit]

In 2004, the Warsaw Municipal Transport Authority's decision to allow cohabiting partners of gay and lesbian employees to travel free on the city's public transport system was the first case of recognition of same-sex couples in Poland. In 2007, a decision of Chorzów's City Center of Social Assistance recognized persons living in a common relationship in the same household as a family, for various purposes associated with the center.

At the end of 2010, a court in Złotów decided that the same-sex partner of a woman who had died was entitled to continue the lease on their communal apartment. The municipality appealed the verdict, but the District Court in Poznań rejected the appeal. Thus, the decision of the Złotów court became final. "The court found that these women actually remained in a stable partnership. Any other interpretation would lead to discrimination based on sexual orientation," said the president of the District Court in Złotów, Adam Jutrzenka-Trzebiatowski.[25]

2018 European Court of Justice ruling[edit]

On 5 June 2018, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that European Union member states (including Poland) must recognise the freedom of movement and residency rights of same-sex spouses, provided one partner is an EU citizen.[26][27][28] The Court ruled that EU member states may choose whether or not to allow same-sex marriage, but they cannot obstruct the freedom of residence of an EU citizen and their spouse. Furthermore, the Court ruled that the term "spouse" is gender-neutral, and that it does not necessarily imply a person of the opposite sex.[29][30]

Registered partnerships[edit]

Before 2005[edit]

The first legislative proposal to recognise unregistered cohabiting couples (including same-sex couples) was proposed in 2002, but did not advance.[31]

In 2004, under a left-wing government, the Senate approved a bill allowing gay and lesbian couples to register their relationships as civil unions. The civil unions proposed by the bill would have given couples a range of benefits, protections and responsibilities currently granted only to opposite-sex married couples, including pension funds, joint tax and death-related benefits, but did not grant the right to adopt children. The bill was passed with 38 votes in favour, 23 against and 15 abstentions. It lapsed due to the 2005 general election.[32]

Only two parties, the Democratic Left Alliance-Labour Union (SLD) and the Social Democracy of Poland (both social democratic parties) supported the bill, while Civic Platform (PO), the League of Polish Families and Law and Justice (PiS) opposed it. Samoobrona was neutral, and the Polish People's Party (PSL) did not take a position.[33]


A new registered partnership bill was proposed to the Government of Civic Platform and the Polish People's Party in late 2007, but was rejected. In 2008, a new fourth bill on registered partnerships was being prepared by the opposition SLD, but stood no chance of being passed in the Parliament and was therefore never introduced.[34]

In June 2009, gay and lesbian organisations submitted a petition calling for registered partnerships to the Speaker of the Sejm, Bronisław Komorowski (PO).[35] By this point, some politicians from parties opposed to same-sex unions, including Jerzy Buzek (PO) and Michał Kamiński (PiS), had expressed support for certain rights being granted to same-sex couples.[36] Attitudes from some representatives of the church had also changed.[37] In January 2010, the opposition SLD, in consultation with gay and lesbian organisations, prepared a new draft law on registered partnerships, modelled on the bill approved by the Senate in 2004 and similar to the French pacte civil de solidarité (PACS).[38] However, the bill had no chance of getting passed in Parliament as PO, PiS and PSL announced that they would not support the bill.[39][40][41][42]

On 17 May 2011, the SLD presented a draft law on registered partnerships, which would regulate the relationships of same-sex and opposite-sex unmarried couples, similar to the French PACS law.[43][44] Agnieszka Pomaska, Deputy Secretary General of the PO, commented that it was time to discuss the legal regulation of informal relationships, both opposite-sex and same-sex, and that PO was open to discussing registered partnerships.[43][45] Prime Minister Donald Tusk (PO) announced that the law on registered partnerships would be passed at the beginning of the next term of the Sejm,[46] but Speaker of the Sejm Grzegorz Schetyna (PO) said that a vote would not be put to Parliament during that legislative term.[47] However, after receiving a petition in favour of the registered partnership bill signed by 23,500 people, Speaker Schetyna declared that he would probably submit the bill for its first reading in Parliament after 10 July 2011.[48] Krzysztof Tyszkiewicz, spokesman of the PO parliamentary group, announced that the PO would support the SLD bill, but only after the parliamentary elections in October 2011.[49]

In July 2011, the Social and Family Policy Commission and the Justice and Human Rights Commission held a first reading of the registered partnership bill. Out of the 67 (32 PO, 23 PiS, 7 SLD, 2 PSL, 3 non-attached) members of the committees, 29 voted in favour, 10 voted against and 3 abstained.[50]

After the bill passed its first reading in the Sejm,[51] the Supreme Court of Poland expressed its opinion on 9 October 2011, before the elections. The Court undermined any further progress of the bill, highlighting numerous legal deficiencies. It also stated that the registration of cohabiting opposite-sex couples was incompatible with Article 18 of the Polish Constitution. Regarding the relationships of same-sex couples, it stated that the admissibility and scope of any statutory regulation required an analysis taking into account international legal obligations, and considering the implications of recent judgments by the European Court of Human Rights.[52] According to Professor Miroslaw Wyrzykowski, head of the Department of Human Rights at the University of Warsaw's Faculty of Law, and a former judge of the Polish Constitutional Court, the Constitution requires the introduction of civil partnerships.[53] In the end, the bill was never voted upon by Parliament, and therefore expired.


After the parliamentary elections of 9 October 2011, Janusz Palikot, the leader of the Palikot Movement (RP), declared that a bill on civil partnerships would be one of the first draft laws submitted to the new Parliament.[54] Leszek Miller, head of the SLD parliamentary grouping, announced that they would reintroduce the same bill as had been introduced in the previous parliaments.[55] Rafał Grupiński, vice president of the PO parliamentary grouping, announced that its members would have a free vote on the draft law. Stanisław Żelichowski, head of the PSL parliamentary grouping, said that he expected the SLD's bill to be mostly ignored by Parliament.[56]

A new draft law based on the one adopted by the Senate in 2004 (similar to the Scandinavian model, not the French PACS), applying to same-sex couples only, would be prepared and submitted to Parliament in early December 2011, as a joint initiative of the SLD and the RP. Some members of PO also declared their support. PSL did not state a firm position on the issue, but was believed to be in support. Only PiS were opposed, though some of its members, such as Witold Waszczykowski, signalled their support.[57][58][59]

Polish MEP Agnieszka Kozlowska-Rajewicz described the adoption of the law on civil partnerships as one of her priorities, though she added that the ideal would be the introduction of same-sex marriage.[60] She also said that civil partnerships similar to the French PACS were the form of unions over which there was agreement at the time, and that the law would be enacted in that parliamentary term.[61] Separately, a government report, entitled Poland 2030 Third wave of modernity – Long-term National Development Strategy, stated that an objective for the five year period to 2015 should be the equalization of rights for stable unmarried couples.[62] Arthur Dunin (PO) commented that many PO parliamentarians saw the need for such a partnership law, provided that it did not go too far. Such a law, which would enable the legal recognition of both same-sex and opposite-sex couples, would be similar to the French PACS, and would also have the support of conservative members of the PO.[63]

On 13 January 2012, the SLD and RP jointly presented two draft laws on civil partnerships to the Sejm. The first bill was the same that had failed in the previous Sejm, similar to the French PACS law (for same-sex and opposite-sex couples), whereas the second bill was similar to the Scandinavian model (for same-sex couples only). The PO intended to introduce its own bill, similar to the French PACS law but including some differences between civil unions and marriages, as required for consistency with the Constitution.[64][65][66][67][68][69] On 28 June, the Legislative Committee expressed the opinion that both bills were unconstitutional. On 24 July, the Sejm voted against the submission for a first reading on the two bills. One day later, the Civic Platform (PO) proposed its own bill on "civil partnership agreements", which was submitted to the Parliament in September.[70]

All three drafts were rejected on 25 January 2013 by the plenary session of the Sejm; the most narrow defeat was for the bill proposed by Civic Platform, which lost by 211-228.[71]


Following the 2015 parliamentary elections, the socially conservative PiS, which is opposed to registered partnerships, formed the new Government.

A new registered partnership bill was proposed on 12 February 2018 by the Modern party.[72][73][74] It was introduced to the Sejm in April 2018.[75]

Same-sex marriage[edit]

Article 18 of the Constitution of Poland states that:[76]

Małżeństwo jako związek kobiety i mężczyzny, rodzina, macierzyństwo i rodzicielstwo znajdują się pod ochroną i opieką Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej.
English translation:[1] Marriage, being a union of a man and a woman, as well as the family, motherhood and parenthood, shall be placed under the protection and care of the Republic of Poland.

The article was adopted in 1997. The purpose of the article has been to ensure that legislators would not be able to legalize same-sex marriage without changing the Constitution.[8][9] Jurists have generally interpreted it as a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.[2][8][9][10][11][77][78][79] A few lawyers have argued that the article does not define marriage, and while promoting opposite-sex marriages, does not in itself ban same-sex marriage.[80][81]

On 7 July 2004, the Supreme Court stated that:[3]

The term "cohabitation" refers only to concubinage, and in particular to the relationship between persons of different sexes, corresponding to the actual status of marriage (which according to Article 18 of the Constitution, is solely a union between persons of different sexes).

On 11 May 2005, the Constitutional Tribunal ruled that:[4]

The Polish Constitution specifies marriage as a union of exclusively of a woman and a man. Thus, a contrario, it does not allow same-sex relationships. [...] Marriage (as a union of a woman and a man) has obtained a separate constitutional status within the domestic law of the Republic of Poland, on the basis of Article 18 of the Constitution. Any change of this status would be possible only by the way of an amendment to the Constitution, according to Article 235 thereof.)

On 9 November 2010, the Constitutional Tribunal held that:[5]

The doctrine of constitutional law also indicates that the only normative element that can be decoded from Article 18 of the Constitution is the principle of heterosexuality of marriage.

On 25 October 2016, the Supreme Administrative Court of Poland stated that:[6]

The Act on Publicly Funded Healthcare Benefits does not explain, however, who is a spouse. But this concept is sufficiently and clearly defined in the aforementioned Article 18 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, which refers to marriage as a union between a woman and a man. The literature emphasizes that Article 18 of the Constitution establishes the principle of heterosexuality of marriage, [...] which prohibits lawmakers from statutory granting the status of marriage to relationships between persons of the same sex. Therefore, it is obvious that marriage in the light of the Constitution, and hence, in the light of Polish law, can only be, and is only a heterosexual union, and thus same-sex individuals cannot be spouses in a marriage.

In 2018, ruling on the recognition of a foreign same-sex marriage, the Supreme Administrative Court of Poland ruled that "Article 18 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, which defines marriage as a union of a man and a woman, [...] requires to treat only a heterosexual union as a marriage in Poland".[7] Specifically, the court ruled that registering same-sex marriages performed outside of Poland would breach the Constitution and the Private International Law Act (Polish: Ustawa z dnia 4 lutego 2011 r. Prawo prywatne międzynarodowe).

Seeking to test the legal wording, a same-sex couple, vloggers Jakub and Dawid, applied to have their Portuguese marriage recognised. Their application was rejected by the Civil Registry in Warsaw, but they appealed to a Voivode. After their case was rejected by the Voivode, they filed suit. On 8 January 2019, the Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Warszawie, the administrative court for the Masovian Voivodeship, ruled that their marriage could not be recognised under Polish law. However, it did rule that should the Family Code and other statutes provide for the institution of same-sex marriage than article 18 would not provide a direct obstacle.[82] The Campaign Against Homophobia praised the ruling,[83] while the Ministry of Justice questioned the court's legal authority.[84][85] The couple sought legal advice on whether to appeal certain parts of the ruling, namely those pertaining to the refusal to recognise their marriage.[82] The justification of the decision is not binding authority. The sentence is binding only on the parties in the proceedings.[86]

Public opinion[edit]

Social attitudes towards the recognition of same-sex couples and their families seem to be changing, based on recent opinion polls. Recent polls have found conflicting numbers in relation to same-sex registered partnerships, with some pollsters finding majorities against, but others finding majorities in support. In general, however, a trend in favor of registered partnerships has been observed over the years. A majority of Poles oppose same-sex marriage and adoption.[87][88] Nonetheless, other polls have found that a majority of Poles support recognising same-sex marriages performed abroad and a large majority support certain rights such as obtaining medical information or inheriting.

The 2015 Eurobarometer found that 28% of Poles thought that same-sex marriage should be allowed throughout Europe, 61% were against.[89] This was an 11% increase from the previous Eurobarometer, which was conducted in 2006. Additionally, the number of those who "strongly opposed" same-sex marriage almost halved from 2006 to 2015. The 2019 Eurobarometer found a large increase in support, with 45% of Poles in support of same-sex marriage, and 50% opposed. This increase of 17% was the second highest in the European Union, after Germany at 18%. Of countries forming the former Eastern Bloc (excluding East Germany), Poland ranked second in support for same-sex marriage, after the Czech Republic.

CBOS polls[edit]

Support for the recognition of same-sex relationships 2001[90] 2002[91] 2003[92] 2005[93] 2008[94] 2010[95] 2011[96] 2013[97] 2017[98] 2019[87]
"registered partnerships" 15% 76% 34% 56% 46% 44% 41% 48% 45% 47% 33% 60% 36% 56% 35% 60%
"same-sex marriages" 24% 69% 22% 72% 18% 76% 16% 78% 25% 65% 26% 68% 30% 64% 29% 66%
"adoption rights" 8% 84% 8% 84% 6% 90% 6% 90% 6% 89% 8% 87% 11% 84% 9% 84%

The 2013 poll found that support for same-sex registered partnerships varied significantly by political parties. 68% of Your Movement (formerly RP) voters supported registered partnerships, 56% of SLD voters, 50% of PO voters, 24% of PSL voters and 15% of PiS voters.

Support for registered partnerships is higher among young people, people who have a higher education, who live in big cities, who have a higher income, who are less religious and who are politically left-wing.

Support for LGBT parenthood 2014[99]
right for a lesbian to parent a child of her female partner 56% 35%
the situation above is morally acceptable 41% 49%
right for a gay (couple) to foster the child of a deceased sibling 52% 39%
the situation above is morally acceptable 38% 53%

IBRiS polls[edit]

Support for the recognition of same-sex relationships VI 2018[100]
"same-sex marriages performed abroad" 59% 30%

2012 CEAPP poll[edit]

Support for the recognition of same-sex relationships[101] opposite-sex couples same-sex couples
"registered partnerships" 72% 17% 23% 65%
"right to obtain medical information" 86% 68%
"right to inherit" 78% 57%
"rights to common tax accounting" 75% 55%
"right to inherit the pension of a deceased partner" 75% 55%
"right to a refund in vitro treatments" 58% 20%
"right to adopt a child" 65% 16%

PBS polls[edit]

Support for the recognition of same-sex relationships 2013[102] 2015[103]
"any form of recognition of same-sex unions" 55%
"notarial agreement" 49% 38%
"registered partnerships" 40% 46% 37% 52%
"same-sex marriages" 30% 56% 29% 61%
"adoption rights" 17% 70% 22% 70%

2013 OBOP poll[edit]

Support for registered partnerships[104] opposite-sex couples same-sex couples
"registered partnerships" 67% 34% 47% 53%

Other polls[edit]

Support for the recognition of same-sex relationships 2011[105]
INSE Research
Homo Homini
"registered partnerships" 54% 41% 30% 70% 55% 39% - - 52% 43% 31.5% 47% 56% 41% 50% 45% - - 44% 46% 57% 39%
"same-sex marriages" 27% 68% - - 27% 69% 20% 71% 38% 57% 28% 50.5% 41% 54% 41% 55% 38% 46% 32% 56% 42% 55%
"adoption rights" 7% 90% - - 14% 84% 20% 71% 16% 80% - - 18% 78% 18% 79% - - 12% 76% 17% 80%
Support for the recognition of same-sex relationships 2006[116]
Pew Research Center
"same-sex marriages" (total) 17% 76% 28% 61% 32% 59% 45% 50%
"same-sex marriages" (somewhat) 12% 16% 19% 25% 25% 28% 31% 25%
"same-sex marriages" (strongly) 6% 61% 9% 36% 8% 31% 14% 25%

See also[edit]


  2. ^ a b "Polish president rules out gay marriage". Radio Poland. 25 January 2017. Retrieved 18 July 2018.
  3. ^ a b Judgment of the Supreme Court of 7 July 2004, II KK 176/04, W dotychczasowym orzecznictwie Sądu Najwyższego, wypracowanym i ugruntowanym zarówno w okresie obowiązywania poprzedniego, jak i obecnego Kodeksu postępowania karnego, a także w doktrynie (por. wypowiedzi W. Woltera, A. Zolla, A. Wąska), pojęcie "wspólne pożycie" odnoszone jest wyłącznie do konkubinatu, a w szczególności do związku osób o różnej płci, odpowiadającego od strony faktycznej stosunkowi małżeństwa (którym w myśl art. 18 Konstytucji jest wyłącznie związek osób różnej płci). Tego rodzaju interpretację Sąd Najwyższy, orzekający w niniejszej sprawie, w pełni podziela i nie znajduje podstaw do uznania za przekonywujące tych wypowiedzi pojawiających się w piśmiennictwie, w których podejmowane są próby kwestionowania takiej interpretacji omawianego pojęcia i sprowadzania go wyłącznie do konkubinatu (M. Płachta, K. Łojewski, A.M. Liberkowski). Rozumiejąc bowiem dążenia do rozszerzającej interpretacji pojęcia "wspólne pożycie", użytego w art. 115 § 11 k.k., należy jednak wskazać na całkowity brak w tym względzie dostatecznie precyzyjnych kryteriów.
  4. ^ a b "Judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal of 11 May 2005, K 18/04". Polska Konstytucja określa bowiem małżeństwo jako związek wyłącznie kobiety i mężczyzny. A contrario nie dopuszcza więc związków jednopłciowych. [...] Małżeństwo (jako związek kobiety i mężczyzny) uzyskało w prawie krajowym RP odrębny status konstytucyjny zdeterminowany postanowieniami art. 18 Konstytucji. Zmiana tego statusu byłaby możliwa jedynie przy zachowaniu rygorów trybu zmiany Konstytucji, określonych w art. 235 tego aktu.
  5. ^ a b "Judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal of 9 November 2010, SK 10/08". W doktrynie prawa konstytucyjnego wskazuje się nadto, że jedyny element normatywny, dający się odkodować z art. 18 Konstytucji, to ustalenie zasady heteroseksualności małżeństwa.
  6. ^ a b "Judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court of Poland of 25 October 2016, II GSK 866/15". Ustawa o świadczeniach zdrowotnych finansowanych ze środków publicznych nie wyjaśnia, co prawda, kto jest małżonkiem. Pojęcie to zostało jednak dostatecznie i jasno określone we wspomnianym art. 18 Konstytucji RP, w którym jest mowa o małżeństwie jako o związku kobiety i mężczyzny. W piśmiennictwie podkreśla się, że art. 18 Konstytucji ustala zasadę heteroseksualności małżeństwa, będącą nie tyle zasadą ustroju, co normą prawną, która zakazuje ustawodawcy zwykłemu nadawania charakteru małżeństwa związkom pomiędzy osobami jednej płci (vide: L. Garlicki Komentarz do art. 18 Konstytucji, s. 2-3 [w:] Konstytucja Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej. Komentarz, Wydawnictwo Sejmowe, Warszawa 2003). Jest wobec tego oczywiste, że małżeństwem w świetle Konstytucji i co za tym idzie - w świetle polskiego prawa, może być i jest wyłącznie związek heteroseksualny, a więc w związku małżeńskim małżonkami nie mogą być osoby tej samej płci.
  7. ^ a b "Judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court of Poland of 28 February 2018, II OSK 1112/16". art. 18 Konstytucji RP, który definiuje małżeństwo jako związek kobiety i mężczyzny, a tym samym wynika z niego zasada nakazująca jako małżeństwo traktować w Polsce jedynie związek heteroseksualny.
  8. ^ a b c Gallo D, Paladini L, Pustorino P, eds. (2014). Same-Sex Couples before National, Supranational and International Jurisdictions. Berlin: Springer. p. 215. ISBN 9783642354342. the drafters of the 1997 Polish Constitution included a legal definition of a marriage as the union of a woman and a man in the text of the constitution in order to ensure that the introduction of same-sex marriage would not be passed without a constitutional amendment.CS1 maint: uses editors parameter (link)
  9. ^ a b c Marek Safjan, Leszek Bosek, eds. (2016). Konstytucja RP. Tom I. Komentarz do art. 1-86. Warszawa: C.H. Beck Wydawnictwo Polska. ISBN 9788325573652. Z przeprowadzonej powyżej analizy prac nad Konstytucją RP wynika jednoznacznie, że zamieszczenie w art. 18 Konstytucji RP zwrotu definicyjnego "związek kobiety i mężczyzny" stanowiło reakcję na fakt pojawienia się w państwach obcych regulacji poddającej związki osób tej samej płci regulacji zbliżonej lub zbieżnej z instytucją małżeństwa. Uzupełniony tym zwrotem przepis konstytucyjny "miał pełnić rolę instrumentu zapobiegającego wprowadzeniu takiej regulacji do prawa polskiego" (A. Mączyński, Konstytucyjne podstawy prawa rodzinnego, s. 772). Innego motywu jego wprowadzenia do Konstytucji RP nie da się wskazać (szeroko w tym zakresie B. Banaszkiewicz, "Małżeństwo jako związek kobiety i mężczyzny", s. 640 i n.; zob. też Z. Strus, Znaczenie artykułu 18 Konstytucji, s. 236 i n.). Jak zauważa A. Mączyński istotą tej regulacji było normatywne przesądzenie nie tylko o niemożliwości unormowania w prawie polskim "małżeństw pomiędzy osobami tej samej płci", lecz również innych związków, które mimo tego, że nie zostałyby określone jako małżeństwo miałyby spełniać funkcje do niego podobną (A. Mączyński, Konstytucyjne podstawy prawa rodzinnego, s. 772; tenże, Konstytucyjne i międzynarodowe uwarunkowania, s. 91; podobnie L. Garlicki, Artykuł 18, w: Garlicki, Konstytucja, t. 3, uw. 4, s. 2, który zauważa, że w tym zakresie art. 18 nabiera "charakteru normy prawnej").CS1 maint: uses editors parameter (link)
  10. ^ a b Scherpe JM, ed. (2016). European Family Law Volume III: Family Law in a European Perspective Family. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 121. ISBN 9781785363047. Constitutional bans on same-sex marriage are now applicable in ten European countries: Article 32, Belarus Constitution; Article 46 Bulgarian Constitution; Article L Hungarian Constitution, Article 110, Latvian Constitution; Article 38.3 Lithuanian Constitution; Article 48 Moldovan Constitution; Article 71 Montenegrin Constitution; Article 18 Polish Constitution; Article 62 Serbian Constitution; and Article 51 Ukrainian Constitution.
  11. ^ a b Stewart J, Lloyd KC (2016). "Marriage Equality in Europe". Family Advocate. 38 (4): 37–40. Article 18 of the Polish Constitution limits the institution of marriage to opposite-sex couples.
  12. ^ Landmark decision of the Supreme Court regarding rights of same-sex partners in criminal law on 24 March 2016
  13. ^ Formalisation of legal family formats in Poland (page 5-6)
  14. ^ Income, troubles and legal family formats in Poland (page 6, 11)
  15. ^ Parenting and legal family formats in Poland
  16. ^ Migration and legal family formats in Poland
  17. ^ Splitting up and legal family formats in Poland
  18. ^ Death and legal family formats in Poland (page 5-6)
  19. ^ Formalisation of legal family formats in Poland. The LawsAndFamilies Database. Retrieved 27 December 2017.
  20. ^ Legal data in source papers - Poland. The LawsAndFamilies Database. Retrieved 27 December 2017.
  21. ^ Strasbourg: Polish gays can inherit. Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  22. ^ Trudne partnerstwo
  23. ^ Lesbian Couple Granted The Right To Register Child As Their Own In Poland
  24. ^ "Gay couple can register child in conservative Poland: Court". Channel NewsAsia. 13 September 2018.
  25. ^ Precedensowy wyrok w Złotowie. Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  26. ^ EU states must recognize foreign same-sex marriages: court, Reuters, June 5, 2018
  27. ^ Rights for same-sex married couples to move around the EU confirmed in landmark ruling, Yahoo News, June 6, 2018
  28. ^ Alina Tryfonidou (7 June 2018). "Rights for same-sex married couples to move around the EU confirmed in landmark ruling". The Conversation.
  29. ^ "Same-sex spouses have equal residency rights". BBC News. 6 June 2018.
  30. ^ JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber) 5 June 2018
  31. ^ (in Polish) SLD chce wspólnego opodatkowania dla par homoseksualnyc
  32. ^ (in Polish) Dodatkowe sprawozdanie Komisji Ustawodawstwa i Praworządności oraz Komisji Polityki Społecznej i Zdrowia o projekcie ustawy o rejestrowanych związkach partnerskich
  33. ^ (in Polish) Projekt uchwały w sprawie inicjatywy ustawodawczej Senatu z dnia 3 grudnia 2004 r.
  34. ^ (in Polish) Założenia ustawy o umowie związku partnerskiego
  35. ^ Petycje: Prawo do zawierania związków. Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  36. ^ Iain Dale's Diary: EXCLUSIVE: My Interview With Michal Kaminski. (9 October 2009). Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  37. ^ Innastrona: Wszyscy na tak, Ustawa o związkach partnerskich w Polsce?. Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  38. ^ Lewica będzie pracować nad projektem ustawy o związkach partnerskich. Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  39. ^ Debata nad ustawą coraz bliżej?. Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  40. ^ Poland's pride?. Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  41. ^ Registered Partnerships in Poland in 2016? Archived 1 July 2010 at the Wayback Machine
  42. ^ Związki partnerskie za sześć lat
  43. ^ a b Projekt ustawy o umowie związku partnerskiego. (PDF) . Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  44. ^ Projekt SLD dla związków partnerskich. (17 May 2011). Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  45. ^ PiS wykorzystuje wszystko, co się da do politycznej rozgrywki. (14 February 2011). Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  46. ^ Tusk: Związki partnerskie po wyborach. Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  47. ^ PO: ustawa o związkach partnerskich jest dobra. Nie będziemy głosować. Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  48. ^ Nasze podpisy odniosły skutek! Będzie debata o związkach partnerskich!". (30 June 2011). Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  49. ^ "Jesteśmy na równi pochyłej. Dziwię się Tuskowi". Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  50. ^ (in Polish) Posiedzenie komisji nr. 303 z dn. 27 July 2011. (27 July 2011). Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  51. ^ Poselski projekt ustawy o umowie związku partnerskiego (First reading in the Committees). Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  52. ^ Uwagi Sądu Najwyższego do projektu ustawy o związkach partnerskich (Polish). Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  53. ^ Konstytucja zobowiązuje do wprowadzenia związków partnerskich (Polish).
  54. ^ Członek Ruchu Palikota ministrem? Jest decyzja. (11 October 2011). Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  55. ^ Palikot nagłaśnia krzyż i marihuanę. A SLD związki partnerskie. Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  56. ^ Poseł PO ujawnia pierwsze powyborcze plany. Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  57. ^ Związek partnerski SLD z Palikotem. (26 October 2011). Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  58. ^ Sejm pochyli się nad związkami partnerskimi. Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  59. ^ WYBORY 2011: Partie o parach żyjących w konkubinacie. Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  60. ^ Rząd chce ustawy o związkach partnerskich.
  61. ^ Związki partnerskie "jeszcze w tej kadencji".
  62. ^ Długookresowa Strategia Rozwoju Kraju. (Part II, page 164).
  63. ^ PO złoży własny projekt ustawy o związkach partnerskich?.
  64. ^ SLD i Ruch Palikota ws. związków partnerskich: Tylko dla homoseksualistów albo zamiast ślubów cywilnych.
  65. ^ Projekt PO ws. związków partnerskich: Dziedziczenie, kredyty oraz... alimenty.
  66. ^ Dunin (PO): jest projekt ustawy o związkach partnerskich.
  67. ^ Związki partnerskie jakby bliżej.
  68. ^ Poselski projekt ustawy – Przepisy wprowadzające ustawę o związkach partnerskich.
  69. ^ Poselski projekt ustawy o związkach partnerskich.
  70. ^ Ustawa o umowie związku partnerskiego.
  71. ^ "Polish parliament rejects efforts to legalize gay unions". 25 January 2013. Retrieved 11 April 2014.
  72. ^ "Nowoczesna z projektem ustawy o związkach partnerskich". (in Polish). Retrieved 16 February 2018.
  73. ^ "Projekt ustawy – przepisy wprowadzające ustawę o związkach partnerskich". (in Polish). Retrieved 16 February 2018.
  74. ^ "Projekt ustawy o związkach partnerskich". (in Polish). Retrieved 16 February 2018.
  75. ^ (in Polish) Kolejny projekt Nowoczesnej. Proponuje wprowadzenie związków partnerskich
  77. ^ "Ryszard Piotrowski: Związki partnerskie – tak, małżeństwa jednopłciowe – nie". (in Polish). 13 February 2019.
  78. ^ "RPO: Bez TK konstytucja nie będzie działać jak należy". (in Polish). 5 September 2016.
  79. ^ "Instytucja małżeństwa w orzecznictwie sądów". (in Polish). 27 April 2019.
  80. ^ "Prof. Łętowska: Nie trzeba zmieniać konstytucji, by wprowadzić w Polsce małżeństwa jednopłciowe". (in Polish). 12 September 2015.
  81. ^ Monika Płatek (14 December 2015). "Konstytucja nie wyklucza małżeństwa jako związku kobiety z kobietą oraz związku mężczyzny z mężczyzną". (in Polish).
  82. ^ a b "IV SA/Wa 2618/18 - Wyrok WSA w Warszawie" (in Polish).
  83. ^ "Sąd: "Konstytucja nie zabrania małżeństw homoseksualnych". Kampania Przeciw Homofobii triumfuje?". (in Polish). 11 February 2019.
  84. ^ ""Kwestia wyłącznie woli ustawodawcy". Sąd o małżeństwach jednopłciowych". (in Polish). 13 February 2019.
  85. ^ "The Constitution does not prohibit same-sex marriages - verdict by the WSA in Warsaw" (in Polish). Retrieved 12 February 2019.
  86. ^ "Komentarz do wyroku Wojewódzkiego Sądu Administracyjnego w Warszawie z 8 stycznia 2019 r., sygn. akt IV SA/Wa 2618/18". Ordo Iuris. 12 February 2019.
  87. ^ a b "Stosunek Polaków do związków homoseksualnych" (PDF). CBOS. July 2019. Retrieved 13 August 2019. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  88. ^ a b "Sondaż: Adopcja dzieci nie dla gejów i lesbijek, śluby też wykluczone". 29 July 2019.
  89. ^ Special Eurobarometer 437
  90. ^ "POSTAWY WOBEC MAŁŻEŃSTW HOMOSEKSUALISTÓW" (PDF). CENTRUM BADANIA OPINII SPOŁECZNEJ. Retrieved 11 April 2014. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  91. ^ "KONKUBINAT PAR HETEROSEKSUALNYCH I HOMOSEKSUALNYCH" (PDF). CENTRUM BADANIA OPINII SPOŁECZNEJ. Retrieved 11 April 2014. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  92. ^ "ZWIĄZKI PARTNERSKIE PAR HOMOSEKSUALNYCH" (PDF). CENTRUM BADANIA OPINII SPOŁECZNEJ. Retrieved 11 April 2014. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  94. ^ Wenzel, Michał. "PRAWA GEJÓW I LESBIJEK" (PDF). CENTRUM BADANIA OPINII SPOŁECZNEJ. Retrieved 11 April 2014. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  95. ^ "PRAWA GEJÓW I LESBIJEK" (PDF). CENTRUM BADANIA OPINII SPOŁECZNEJ. Retrieved 11 April 2014. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  96. ^ "Polacy: Związki partnerskie nie dla gejów". 28 February 2013. Retrieved 11 April 2014.
  97. ^ "STOSUNEK DO PRAW GEJÓW I LESBIJEK ORAZ ZWIĄZKÓW PARTNERSKICH" (PDF). CENTRUM BADANIA OPINII SPOŁECZNEJ. Retrieved 11 April 2014. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  98. ^ CBOS: Ponad połowa Polaków traktuje homoseksualizm jako odstępstwo od normy
  99. ^ CBOS: Jesteśmy za wychowywaniem dzieci przez pary homoseksualne [...] Archived 29 November 2014 at the Wayback Machine. (14 November 2014). Retrieved 15 November 2014.
  100. ^ 59 proc. Polaków chce uznania małżeństw jednopłciowych zawartych za granicą. Retrieved 19 July 2018.
  101. ^ Równe traktowanie standardem dobrego rządzenia. (pages 36–39.
  102. ^ Polski rekord tolerancji: 40 proc. z nas akceptuje związki partnerskie dla homoseksualistów. (9 October 2013). Retrieved 12 October 2013.
  103. ^ Postawy wobec równości małżeńskiej w Polsce. Miłość Nie Wyklucza (May 2015). Retrieved 14 June 2019.
  104. ^ TNS Polska: 67 proc. za prawami związków partnerskich heteroseksualnych.
  105. ^ Gej przestraszył Platformę. (31 May 2011). Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  106. ^ "Zdecydowane "nie" dla legalizacji związków partnerskich [SONDAŻ TOK FM]". 1 February 2013.
  107. ^ Sondaż Super Expressu o związkach partnerskich: Polacy przeciw małżeństwom homo!. Retrieved 22 June 2013.
  108. ^ "Sondaż: Według 86,5 proc. Polaków małżeństwo to związek mężczyzny i kobiety". 19 April 2017.
  109. ^ "Po raz pierwszy w Polsce zwolennicy jednopłciowych związków partnerskich są w większości. Może już czas". 26 June 2017. Retrieved 26 June 2017.
  110. ^ "Polki i Polacy o równości małżeńskiej – wyniki naszego sondażu". 11 July 2018.
  111. ^ "Rekordowe poparcie dla związków partnerskich i równości małżeńskiej". 25 February 2019.
  112. ^ "Sondaż "Wyborczej": Rekordowe poparcie dla prawa do aborcji na żądanie". 17 April 2019. Retrieved 22 April 2019.
  113. ^ "Co z legalizacją małżeństw homoseksualnych? "Dla Polaków to wciąż związek kobiety i mężczyzny" [SONDAŻ]". 24 April 2019.
  114. ^ "Sondaż: Polacy popierają związki partnerskie, ale nie chcą Marszów Równości". 24 September 2019.
  115. ^ "Spora większość Polaków chce związków partnerskich. To reakcja na szczucie na LGBT?". 24 September 2019.
  116. ^ Eurobarometer 66. (page 80) Retrieved 1 March 2018.
  117. ^ Discrimination in the EU in 2015. (pages 373-374) Retrieved 1 March 2018.
  118. ^ Religious Belief and National Belonging in Central and Eastern Europe. (page 28) Retrieved 1 March 2018.
  119. ^ Religious Belief and National Belonging in Central and Eastern Europe. (page 176) Retrieved 1 March 2018.
  120. ^ "Eurobarometer on Discrimination 2019".. (page 45) Retrieved 25 September 2019.

External links[edit]