Este tabla de casos, actualizada regularmente, se basa en los casos mencionados en el libro El aborto en el derecho transnacional : Casos y controversias, ed . Rebecca J. Cook , Joanna N. Erdman y Bernard Dickens (Fondo de Cultura Economica, 2016).  Esta tabla incluye la jurisprudencia nacional, regional e internacional .
Más información sobre el libro está en línea aquí.      AN ENGLISH VERSION OF THIS PAGE IS ONLINE HERE.


Jurisprudencia Nacional 


Bundesverfassungsgericht [Tribunal Constitucional Federal], 39 BVerfGE 1, 25 de febrero de 1975.  Sentencia en alemánSentencia en Inglés por R. Jonas y J. GorbyExtra copia.  [Abortions on request within 3 months struck down as unconstitutional, except in cases of rape or danger to the mother’s health or where a child would be born with health problems amounting to grave hardship; the unborn is protected under the Constitution.]

Bundesverfassungsgericht [Tribunal Constitucional Federal], 88 BVerfGE 203, 28 de mayo de 1993. Sentencia en alemánSentencia en Inglés.   Extra copia.  [Abortion would remain illegal, except within the first 12 weeks if the woman first attends dissuasive counseling; abortion remained legal in cases of rape, danger to mother’s health and severe fetal malformation.]


Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación, F., A.L., Expediente Letra “F,” No. 259, Libro XLVI, 3 de marzo de 2012.(Arg.), Sentencia en español.   Extra copia.     Traducción no oficial Inglés[abortion allowed in cases of rape; no judicial authorization necessary]

Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación, Portal de Belén–Associación Civil sin Fines de Lucro v. Ministerio de Salud y Acción Social de La Nación s/ amparo, N° P.709.XXXVI, 5 de marzo de 2002.  Dictamen del procurador general de la nación y Fallo de la Corte Suprema.  Extra copia. [emergency contraceptive brand “Imediat” deemed abortive, and therefore banned.]

Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación, T., S. v. Gobierno de la ciudad de Bueºnos Aires, Amparo No. T.421. XXXVI, 7 de diciembre de 2001.Sentencia en español. Extra copia.  [Court allowed induced labour in anencephaly case; hospital or city government must provide a substitute for a conscientious objector.]

Juzgado en lo Contencioso Administrativo y Tributario Poder Judicial de la ciudad de Buenos Aires, Profamilia Asoc. Civil. v. Gobierno de la ciudad de Buenos Aires y otros s/impugnación de actos administrativos, Expte: EXP 31117/0, 7 de noviembre
de 2008. Sentencia en espanol.  Extra copia.  [Court reaffirmed access to non-punishable abortions; ordered investigations into persons who tried to obstruct one.]

Sala “A” de la Cámara de Apelaciones de la Provincia de Chubut, M., Expte. 93/10, 19 de marzo de 2010.   Sentencia en español.   Extra copia.  [Abortion is allowed for a rape victim, even without mental illness/disability.]

Sala “B” de la Cámara en lo Criminal de la Provincia de Río Negro, F.N.M., mayo de 2009.  Sentencia en españolExtra copia. [Abortion is allowed for a rape victim, even without mental illness/disability.]

Superior Tribunal de la Provincia de Chubut, F., A.L. s/ medida autosatisfactiva, Expte. 21.912-F-2010, 8 de marzo de 2010.  Sentencia en español.  Extra copia.  [Abortion is allowed for rape victims.]

Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Provincia de Buenos Aires, C.R.O. v. Provincia de Buenos Aires, C 85566, 24 de julio de 2002., Sentencia en español.     Extra copia.  [Induced labour is allowed in the case of anencephaly.]

Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Provincia de Buenos Aires, C.P. d. P., A.K. s/autorización, LLBA, 27 de junio de 2005.  Sentencia en españolExtra copia. [Medical professionals do not need judicial authorization before performing legal abortion when there is a risk to the woman’s health or life.]

Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Provincia de Buenos Aires, Causa Ac. 98.830, “R.,L.M., ‘NN Persona por nacer. Protección.  Denuncia.’”, 31 de julio de 2006. Sentencia en españolExtra copia.   ["L.M.R. case": a raped woman with a disability was denied abortion by a judge, but this higher court allowed abortion, and reiterated that judicial authorization is unnecessary for legal abortions.]

Tribunal de Familia de Bahía Blanca, Causa 30.790, S.G.N s/situación, 1 de octubre de 2008. [not online.]  [Court authorized abortion for a raped girl with a mental disability.]


Clubb v Edwards  [and] Preston v Avery [2019] HCA 11, (10 April 2019)  M46/2018 & H2/2018.  Sentencia en InglesExtra copia[Safe access zones outside abortion providers was upheld as constitutional.]


[Tribunal Constitucional,] Erklaerungen des Verfassungsgerichtshofs 221, 11 de octubre de 1974.  [Not online.] [Constitutional court upheld penal code provision which decriminalized abortions within the first three months of pregnancy.]


Tribunal Constitucional Plurinacional [Plurinational Constitutional Court of Bolivia, Sentencia 0206/2014, February 5, 2014.   Buscar 0206/2014Extra copiaSummario en ingles.  [Abortion ban is constitutional, except in cases of rape, incest or to protect the life and health of the woman;  having to report rape to the police and obtain judicial authorization before obtaining an abortion  is unconstitutional.]


Supremo Tribunal Federal, Ação Direta de Inconstitucionalidade No. 3510, 29 de mayo de 2008.  Sentencia en portugués.  Extra copia. [research use of embryos and stem cells upheld as constitutional. Pre-implantation embryos are not persons.  In-vitro fertilization is consistent with family planning rights.]

Supremo Tribunal Federal, ADPF 54/DF, 12 de Abril de 2012.  Sentencia en portugués.   Backup copy.  [Anencephaly: penal code provisions criminalising abortion of anencephalic fetuses are unconstitutional.]

Supremo Tribunal Federal   "Habeas Corpus"  No. 84.025-6/RJ. Rio de Janeiro.  Nov 29, 2016.  Sentencia Roberto Barroso.       Noticias STF em português.  Extra copia.  [Prohibiting abortion within three months' gestation violates the rights of women, including equality rights.] 


Christian Medical and Dental Society of Canada v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, 2018 ONSC 579, File no. 499/16/ 500/16, Decision of Jan 31, 2018 (Ontario: Superior Court of Justice, Divisional Court). Decision online.  Backup copy.  Summary of Case.    [Conscientious objectors who are physicians must provide an effective referral to another provider.]

Christian Medical and Dental Society of Canada v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, 2019 ONCA 393, Doc. no. C65397, Decision of May 15, 2019. (Canada: Ontario Court of Appeals)  Decision online.   Backup copy.  [Upheld decision of 2018.]  

Corte Suprema de Canadá, McInerney v. MacDonald [1992] 2 S.C.R. 138, 93 D.L.R. (4th) 415, 11 de junio de 1992.  Sentencia en InglésExtra copia.  [Patient-physician relationship based on fiduciary duty; physicians to act with the utmost faith and loyalty.]

Corte Suprema de Canadá, R. v. Morgentaler [1988] 1 S.C.R. 30, 44 D.L.R. (4th) 385, 28 de enero de 1988.,  Sentencia en Inglés.   Extra copia.  [Decriminalized abortion in Canada; law that allowed abortion only at certified hospitals after approval by an abortion committee  is unconstitutional due to excessive requirements and delay in accessing services.]

Corte Suprema de Canadá, Tremblay. v. Daigle [1990] 2 S.C.R. 530, 62 D.L.R. (4th) 634, 8 de agosto de 1989. Sentencia en InglésExtra copia.  [A fetus is not a "person".]


Corte Suprema de Justicia, sentencia Rol 2.186-2001, 30 de agosto de 2001.  Sentencia en español. Extra copia.  [Protection of the unborn begins at conception, so emergency contraception is banned as a form of abortion.]

Tribunal Constitucional, sentencia Rol 740-07-CDS, 18 de abril de 2008.  Sentencia en españolExtra copia.  [2006 government policy announced availability ofemergency contraception (EC) for anyone over 14. Court could not determine medical effects of EC on a fertilized egg, and banned EC since life begins at conception in the Constitution.]

Tribunal Constitucional  STC Rol 3729-17, 28 de agosto de 2017, Sentencia en español.    Extra copia. Accompanying documents.    Other Submissions.      Síntesis en Espanol.   Sentencia en Ingles con Tabla de Contenido por sentencia en espanol.  [Court upheld as constitutional a new law decriminalizing abortion on three grounds: imminent risk to life of mother; fatal fetal disease and pregnancy resulting from rape, but institutions can invoke conscientious objection.]

Tribunal Constitucional, 18 de enero de  2019, STC Rol N° 5572-18-CDS / 5650-18-CDS (acumuladas).  Sentencia en español Extra copia.  [Upheld unconstitutionality claim against new regulations governing institutional conscientious objection.]


Corte Constitucional, Sentencia C-013/97, 23 de enero de 1997.. Sentencia en español.  Extra copia. [abortion is a criminally punishable act, but Court allowe lower sentencing for abortion crime if the pregnancy resulted from rape.]

Corte Constitucional, sentencia C-013/97, 14 de mayo enero de 2002.  Sentencia en español.   Extra copia.  [proportionality principle requires that criminalization be avoided when the state has less restrictive means to secure the same values]

Corte Constitucional, Sentencia C-355/06, 10 de mayo de 2006.  Sentencia en español.   Extra copiaExtractos en Español.   Extractos en Ingles.   [Abortion not punishable on grounds of woman’s health or life; serious fetal malformations; or rape, incest or artificial insemination without consent, if unlawful act was reported to authorities.]

Corte Constitucional, Sentencia T-209/08, 28 de febrero de 2008. Decisión en españolExtra copia. [Conscientious objection can only be invoked by natural persons, not institutions; health care system must guarantee an adequate number of providers to provide services for legal abortions.]

Corte Constitucional Sentencia  T-388/09, 2009.   Sentencia en español.   Extra copia.  [Conscientious objection is not an absolute right; it is only allowed when there is another capable health provider is available soon enough to avoid risking the woman’s life or health.]

Corte Constitucional, Sentencia T-841/11, 3 de noviembre de 2011. Decisión en españolExtra copia.  [Health administrator forced to pay damages for obstructing a legal abortion in a case where doctor had certified risk to a minor’s mental health.]

Corte Constitucional, Sentencia T-627/12, 10 de agosto de 2012.  Decisión en españolExtra copia.  [State must provide accurate information; three state officials must correct false information about emergency contraception, abortion and conscientious objection.]

Corte Constitucional [Constitutional Court], 2018, Sentencia SU-096/18. Decision in Spanish. [government to facilitate access to abortion despite conscientious objection.]

Corte Constitucional, December 11, 2019, Sentencia SU-599/19.  Decisión en español. Comment in English. [Females forced into an armed group who suffer forced contraception or forced abortion qualify as "victims" in reparations law after armed conflict.]

Corte Constitucional, March 2, 2020. Expediente D-13225, Boletín No. 25:  La ausencia de claridad, certeza, especificidad pertinencia y suficiencia en los cargos de inconstitucionalidad formulados en contra del artículo 122 del Código Penal, condujo a que la Corte se inhibiera de proferir una decisión de fondo.  Decisión en español.  News article in English. [Three exceptions to criminal law against abortion will continue; all other abortion remains illegal.]

Corte Constitucional [Constitutional Court] February 21, 2022, Sentencia C-055-22.  English summary by Causa Justa.   27-page Spanish communicado27-page unofficial English translationNota de Prensa (Spanish).   Unofficial English translation.  (Abortion is decriminalized within 24 weeks of gestation.]


Case on the Recognition of Fetuses as Entities with Fundamental Rights, Case No. 2004Hun-Ba81, July 31, 2008. 
Official Summary. [Fetus has constitutional right to life, but parents cannot inherit right to sue doctor on fetus's behalf.]

Case on the Prohibition of Revealing the Sex of a Fetus, Case No. 2004Hun-Ma1010, KCCR (Constitutional Court of Korea).  Decision of July 31, 2008.  Official summary in English Extra copy. [Prohibition of fetal sex disclosure is limited to before 32 weeks' gestation.]

Case on the Crimes of Abortion, Apr 11, 2019 / Case No. : 2017Hun-Ba127, KCCR)  (Constitutional Court of Korea) en Ingles,  "Major Decisions".   PDF downloaded 30 mayo 2019.  [Abortion law is unconstitutional and will be abolished in one year unless replaced.]


Corte Suprema de Justicia, Sala Constitucional, Sentencia No. 2000-02306, 15 de marzo de 2000.  Decisión en español.   Extra copia.  [ban on in vitro fertilization (due to prenatal personhood).]

Corte Suprema de Justicia, Sala Constitucional.  Resolución No 02792-2004, 17 de marzo del 2004. Expediente 02-007331-0007-CO.  Resolución en españolExtra copia. [re prenatal personhood, wrongful death of fetus]

Corte Suprema de Justicia, Sala Constitucional, Sentencia No.442/2004, 2004. 7 de may del 2004. Decisión en español.  Extra copia. [re: prenatal personhood; health provider convicted of homicide]

Corte Suprema de Justicia, Sala Constitucional, Sentencia No. 1267/2005, 2005.  Decisión en español.   Extra copia.  [re prenatal personhood, constitutionality of the crime of abortion upheld]


Corte Constitucional de Croatia.  Sentencia de 2 de marzo de 2017.  Rješenje Ustavnog Suda Republike Hrvatske, broj: U-I-60/1991 i dr. od 21.veljace 2017.  Sentencia en croata.   Extra copia.  Resumen en inglés.   [Upheld as constitutional: Law allowing abortion on request within first ten weeks of pregnancy, and thereafter in cases of rape, risk to the woman’s life, or severe fetal impairments.]


Corte Constitucional, José Fernando Roser Rohde c. Instituto Nacional de Higiene y Medicina Tropical “Leopoldo Izquiéta Pérez y el Ministro de Salud S/Acción deAmparo, 14 de junio de 2006. Spanish Decision (direct download).  Backup copy.  Summary in English.  [Constitutional court upheld ban of emergency contraceptives, deciding that the rights of women do not take precedence over the rights of the unborn after fertilization occurs.]

*Corte Constituciónal [Constitutional Court], Acción Pública de Inconstitucionalidad,  Expediente No. 34-19-IN/21, 28 de abril de 2021.  Sumario en españolSentencia en español   Extra copia. [Abortion allowed in all cases of rape; previously only allowed in cases of rape if woman had a mental disability.]


Supreme Court of El Salvador, Sentencia 18/98 (Inconstitucionalidad), Nov 20, 2007.  Sentencia en español.   Extra copia.  [Law criminalizing all abortion upheld as constitutional.]

Supreme Court of El Salvador, Sala Constitutional B./2013, Decision 310-2013, May 28, 2013 (Case of "Beatriz")
Sentencia en españolExtra copia. [Woman with lupus and kidney failure denied abortion for fetus with anencephaly.]


Ústavný Súd [Tribunal Constitucional], Decisión PL. ÚS 12/01, Colección de Leyes de la República de Eslovaquia No. 14/2008, vol. 8, 4 de diciembre de 2007.    Sentencia en espanol.   Excerpts en inglés.   Overview in English.  [upheld constitutionality of 1986 law allowing abortions up to 12 weeks' gestation; abortions for “genetic” reasons such as fetal abnormalities allowed after 12 weeks]


Tribunal Constitucional, Sentencia S.T.C. 53/1985, 1985-49 BJC 515, 11 de abril de 1985.  Sentencia en español - descargar.   Sentencia en español en líneaExtra copia.  [upheld constitutionality of draft law decriminalizing abortion in cases of risk to physical or mental health of woman, cases of rape, and fetal malformation; law had procedural defects which needed correction; law was ultimately passed in July 1985]

Zurich Insurance PLC, Sucursal en España vDoña Encarnacion y don César y Servicio Galego de Saude, Sentencia 00392/2017, Apelación 43/17 (High Court of Galicia at Coruña, Spain)  Sentencia en español.    Extra copia.  Commentario en inglés. [La sanidad pública condenada por retrasar el aborto ​de una mujer que perdió su útero por culpa de la objeción de conciencia médica] 

Tribunal Supremo de España, Sala Tercera, de lo Contencioso-administrativo, Sección 4ª, S 1231/2022, 3 Oct. 2022 (Rec. 6147/2021)  Sentencia en españolExtra copiaDecision in EnglishEnglish backup copy.   [La Administración no puede bloquear sin autorización judicial el acceso a una web que contenga información u opinión -- incluyendo información sobre servicios de aborto (Women on Web)]


Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos, Bellotti v. Baird, 443 U.S. 622. (1979).   Sentencia en inglés.     Alternate link.  [Massachusetts law on parental consent declared unconstitutional; where a state requires a minor to obtain parental consent before procuring abortion, there must also be an alternative procedure for a minor to procure abortion without parental consent]

Corte de Apelaciones del Segundo Distrito de California, Brownfield v. Daniel Freeman Marina Hospital, 208 Cal. App. 3d 405; 256 Cal. Rptr. 240 (1989).   Sentencia en inglés.  [Catholic hospital did not violate a law when it (1) refused to provide emergency contraception to a rape victim and (2) refused to inform her that she could obtain emergency contraception from a health professional within 72 hours of the rape.]

Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, No. 19-1392, 597 U.S. _ (2022) (Supreme Court of the United States), June 24, 2022  Decision online.  Case summary by CRR.    Amicus brief by Martha Davis et al.  [held that the Constitution of the United States does not confer a right to abortion].

Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos, Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 U.S. 124 (2007).  Decisión en Inglés.    Extra copia.  [Court upheld the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban, a law which effectively banned most late-term abortions: states have an interest in preserving life and the ban fit into this interest as it did not create an undue burden on women]

Corte Suprema de Oklahoma, In RE Initiative Petition No. 349, State Question No. 642, 1992 OK 122 (1992).  Decisión en inglés.  [Oklahoma Supreme Court prohibited ballot question on abortion because if it was answered in the affirmative, it would be unconstitutional in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey]

June Medical Services v. Russo 140 S.Ct. 2103 (2020).  Decision online.    Backup copy.   Summary of case from CRR.  [declared unconstitutional a Louisiana law requiring doctors at abortion clinics to have hospital privileges at a state-authorized hospital within 30 miles of the clinic.]  

Tribunal Superior de Nueva Jersey, División de Apelación, N.J. Div. of Youth & Family Serv. v. V.M., 974 A.2d 448 (2009).   Sentencia  en inglés.  [ruled that the refusal to consent to a caesarian section, used in maternal child abuse case, is beyond the legislative scope of child-protective statutes]

Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos, Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth, 428 U.S. 52 (1976).  Sentencia en Inglés  [declared unconstitutional: a Missouri law requiring spousal consent for a woman to obtain an abortion, and requiring parental consent for a minor to obtain an abortion]

Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos, Planned Parenthood of Kansas City Missouri, Inc. et al. v. Ashcroft, 462 U.S. 476 (1983).  Sentencia en inglés.  [Missouri law which mandated abortions after 12 weeks be performed in a hospital unconstitutional; other Missouri laws allowing a pathology report for abortions, requiring a second doctor be present at abortions performed after viability, and mandating minors to obtain parental or court consent for an abortion were upheld as constitutional].

Corte de Apelaciones del Octavo Circuito, Planned Parenthood of Minn., N.D. & S.D. v. Rounds, 530 F.3d 724, (2011). Sentencia revisado de 2012.    Extra copia.  [upheld South Dakota law requiring doctors to inform abortion-seeking patients that abortions increased risk of suicide ideation and suicide; the law was not considered a violation of freedom of speech or due process rights.]

Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos, Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992).  Sentencia en inglés.   Backup copy.   Sentencia en inglés.   Extra copia.    [Court upheld Roe v. Wade, new "undue burden" standard in assessing the validity of abortion laws; undue burden defined as “substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion before the fetus attains viability”]

Rodriguez v. City of Chicago, 156 F. 3rd 771 (1998) (Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals).   Decision online.     Backup copy.  [Illinois police officer who objected to abortion wanted to be exempt from providing security to abortion clinics on the basis that it acts as religious discrimination; court dismissed the claim]

Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos, Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).  Sentencia en inglés.    Extra copia.  [14th amendment right to privacy protects a woman's right to choose whether to have an abortion; the right is not absolute and must be balanced against government interests in protecting prenatal health; trimester model was employed, such that women could have an abortion on request during first trimester; reasonable regulations in the second and third trimester were permissible as long as there are exceptions for health considerations]

Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos, Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914 (2000).  Sentencia en Inglés.    Extra copia.  [Nebraska law banning partial-birth abortion without regard for health of the mother declared unconstitutional; Court used the undue burden standard developed in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey]

Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, 579 U.S. 582 (2016).  Decision online.   Backup copy.   Commentary on case from Planned Parenthood.   [ a Texas law which required abortion providers to meet the same standards as ambulatory surgical centres and that abortion providers must have admitting privileges at a hosptial within 30 miles was declared unconstitutional as they created an undue burden for women seeking an abortion.]


Consejo Constitucional, Décision No. 74-54 DC, D.S.Jur. 529 [1975] A.J.D.A. 134, 15 de enero de 1975.
 Sentencia en francésTraducción oficial en Inglés.   Extra copia.  [Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy Act upheld as constitutional to allow abortions in cases of necessity or distress after a woman has received counselling.]

Consejo Constitucional, Decisión No. 2001-446 DC, 27 de junio de 2001..  Sentencia en francésTraducción oficial en Inglés.   Extra copia.  [Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy and Contraception Act declared constitutional,  abortion is unrestricted within 12 weeks (increased from 10 weeks).]

Consejo de Estado, No. 13028, D.S. Jur. 19, 732, 1982. Sentencia en francés.    Extra copia.  [A woman can choose abortion without including her spouse in the process established by law; husband’s claim seeking damages from hospital dismissed.]


Corte Constitucional, sentencia48/1998 (XI. 23), Magyar Közlöny [Gaceta Ofi cial]
MK 1998/105, 18 de noviembre de 1998.  Sentencia en húngaroExtra copia.  Traducción oficial en Inglés. [Law allowing abortion when a pregnant woman is in a situation of "grave crisis" was upheld as constitutional, however the determination of "grave crisis" was deemed unconstitutional as it allowed a woman to self-declare the "grave crisis" by signing a form; this was a violation of the state’s obligation to protect the right to life of the fetus.]


Indu Devi v the State of Bihar and Others [2017] Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 14327/2017, Judgment of May 9, 2017 (Supreme Court of India).  Sentencia en inglés..  Extra copia.  Comment on Reprohealthlaw blog.  [HIV-positive raped woman tried to obtain an abortion at 17 weeks and experienced undue delays, for which State of Bihar was chastised. At Supreme Court she was 26 weeks pregnant, so request for abortion was denied because of risk of the procedure.]

Meera Santosh Pal and Ors v Union of India and Ors [2017]  Writ Petition (Civil) No. 17 of 2017  January 16 2017 (Supreme Court of India)  Sentencia en inglésExtra copia. [Abortion allowed for anencephalic fetus at 24 weeks due to risk to the woman’s health.]


Suprema Corte de Irlanda, Attorney General v. X, [1992] I.E.S.C. 1, 5 de marzo de 1992.  Sentencia  en InglésExtra copia.  [Abortion allowed when there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother, including risk of suicide.]

Suprema Corte de Irlanda, Baby Oladapo v. Minister for Justice [2002] I.E.S.C. 44, 6 de junio de 2002.,  Sentencia  en InglésExtra copia.  [Pregnant refugee claimant appealed a deportation order as a violation of right to life of the unborn; appeal dismissed, court determined right of unborn was not applicable.]

Suprema Corte de Irlanda, McGee v. Attorney General, [1974] I.R. 284, 19 de diciembre de 1973.  Sentencia  en Inglés.   Extra copia.  [Married persons have a constitutional right to make decisions related to family planning, and these are protected by the right to privacy.]


Corte de Apelaciones, Family Planning Association of Northern Ireland v. Minister for Health, Social Services and Public Safety, [2004] NICA 39 October 8, 2004,.  Sentencia en Inglés.   Extra copia.  [abortion for fetal abnormality is only lawful the pregnancy threatens the woman’s life OR would have serious and permanent or long term effects on her physical or mental health]

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, Re Judicial Review [2015] NIQB 96, November 30, 2015  (High Court of Justice in Belfast).  Sentencia  en Inglés.   Extra copiaSummario.   Reprohealthlaw blog.  [Northern Ireland’s abortion laws are incompatible with European Convention on Human Rights Article 8 because it does not allow exceptions for fatal fetal abnormalities, rape, or incest.The  judgment also has implications for Commonwealth countries that retain the English 1861 Offences Against the Person Act.]

In the matter of an application by the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission forJudicial Review [2018] UKSC27 On appeal from: [2017] NICA 42  (Supreme Court, U.K.), 7 June, 2018.  Sentencia  en InglésExtra copia.  [substantial agreement with NIHRC ruling of 2015 above, but NIHRC lacked standing to bring the appeal, so could not declare NI abortion laws incompatible] 

"Ewart's (Sarah Jane) Application,"  (case also known as Sarah Ewart v  NI Departments of Justice and Health), October 3, 2019.  (High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division).   Summario.   Sentencia en InglesExtra copia.  [2019] NIQB 88.  [Court followed the ruling of the UK Supreme Court  that  Northern ireland  abortion law is incompatible with ECHR Article 8 in relation to fatal foetal abnormality (“FFA”).]

R (on the application of A and B) v Secretary of State for Health, decision of  [2017] UKSC 41, June 14, 2017 (Supreme Court, U.K.) [ruled that girl from Northern Ireland, aged 15, was not entitled to NHS-funded abortion in England]  Sentencia  en InglésExtra copiaComentarios por Sheelagh McGuinness y Keith Syrett.  Reporte de periodico. [Northern Ireland women are not entitled to NHS-funded abortion in England; re case of 15-year-old girl from NI who had to travel and pay for an abortion.]

In re NIHRC (Abortion), "In the matter of an application by The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission for Judicial Review - In the matter of the failure by the Secretary of State, Executive Committee and Minister of Health to provide women with access to Abortion and Post Abortion Care in All Public Health Facilities in Northern Ireland [2021] NIQB 91 Delivered 14 October 2021.    Decision onlineBackup copy.    Official SummaryNews story.   [Secretary of State failed to comply with 2019 Act  to "expeditiously" provide women in Northern Ireland access to high quality abortion and post abortion services].


Suprema Corte de Israel, A. v. B., 35 (iii) P.D. 57, 1981.   Para ver un resumen en Inglés , ver: C. Shalev, "A Man's Right to be Equal: The Abortion Issue." Israel Law Review 1983; 18:381-430.  [Paternal consent to abortion is  not required.]


Corte Constitucional, sentencia no. 27, 98 Foro It. I, 515, 18 de febrero de 1975.  Sentencia en italianoSentencia en inglés.  [Penal code provision criminalizing all abortions deemed unconstitutional; fetus has a right to life, but abortion will be lawful if continuing the pregnancy endangers the life, physical or mental health of the mother.]


Federation of Women Lawyers (Fida – Kenya) & 3 others v Attorney General & 2 others; East Africa Center for Law & Justice & 6 others (Interested Party) & Women’s Link Worldwide & 2 others (Amicus Curiae) [2019] eKLR, Petition No. 266 of 2015, Decision of June 11, 2019.  [Case of "JMM," a teenager who died after botched illegal abortion.]  (High Court of Kenya at Nairobi, Constitutional and Human Rights Division), Decision date: June 12, 2019.   Sentencia  en Inglés.  Extra copia. 
  [Raped teenager died of complications of botched illegal abortion after Ministry of Health withdrew training guidelines.  Abortion legally permitted in cases of rape where it causes danger to the life or health of the woman; government’s withdrawal of safe abortion guidelines was not justified.]

Republic v Jackson Namunya Tali [2014] eKLR, High Court Criminal Case No. 75 of 2009 (High Court of Kenya at Nairobi).  Sentencia en inglésExtra copia.  Summario en inglés.    [Court convicts nurse of murder over abortion related death]

Republic v. Jackson Namunya Tali, [2017] Criminal Appeal No. 173 of 2016.  October 19, 2017.  Sentencia en inglés.    Extra copia.  [Nurse acquitted by Court of Appeal after 8 years awaiting death penalty for abortion-related death.]

PAK & Salim Mohammed v. Attorney General & 3 Others (Constitutional Petition E009 of 2020) [2022] KEHC 262 (KLR) (24 March 2022) (High Court of Kenya at Malindi)  Decision online.   Backup copy.    Press release by CRR. [abortion care is a fundamental constitutional right. Arrests of patients and clinicians are illegal. Parliament is directed to align law and policy with the Constitution.]


Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación, Acción de inconstitucionalidad 10/2000, 31 de enero de 2002.  Sentencia en español. [upheld constitutionality of Federal District amendment to penal code which allowed abortion in cases of rape, unwanted artificial insemination, fetal malformations and danger to the mother’s health.]

Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación, Acción de Inconstitucionalidad 146/2007 y su acumulada 147/2007, 28 de agosto de 2008.   Sentencia  en españolExtra copia.  [Upholding judgement of 2002, balancing fetal personhood and the indications model.]

Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación, Controversia constitucional 54/2009, 2010.  Documento en espanol.   Extra copia.  [upheld as constitutional a federal health directive requiring health professionals to offer rape victims emergency contraception and legal abortion.]

Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación, Acción de inconstitucionalidad 11/2009, 2011. (Baja California) Sentencia en español.      Extra copia.  [upheld amendment to its state constitution that life begins at conception which had the effect of limiting abortions.]

Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación, Acción de inconstitucionalidad 62/2009, 2011. (San Luis Potosí). Sentencia  en español.   Extra copia.   [upheld amendment to state constitution that life begins at conception which had the effect of limiting abortions.]

 Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación, Segunda Sala 2018,  Amparo en Revisión 601/2017 [Caso de "Marimar"] (Ciudad de Mexico) April 4, 2018.  Sentencia en españolExtra copia.  [woman's denial of a legal abortion after rape was a violation of her rights]

Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación, Segunda Sala [Supreme Court] 2018,  Amparo en Revisión 1170/2017 [Caso de "Fernanda"] (Ciudad de Mexico) April 18, 2018. Sentencia  en español.   Extra copia.  [woman's denial of a legal abortion after rape was a violation of her rights]

Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación, Primera Sala [Supreme Court] 2019,  Amparo en Revisión 1388/2015
[Case of "Marisa"]  May 15, 2019.  Sentencia  en español.  Sentencia traducido en ingles.  [denying access to abortion is a violation of the right to health; the right to health involves a woman’s own perception and knowledge about her own standard of wellness]

Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación [Supreme Court] 2021,  Acción de inconstitucionalidad AI 148/2017, Sept 7, 2021  Sentencia  en español.   Communicado  en españolOfficial press release in English.  [criminalizing abortion is unconstitutional; state interests in protecting fetus cannot outweigh the reproductive rights of women.]

*Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación [Supreme Court] 2021, Acción de inconstitucionalidad AI 106/2018 and 107/2018), Sept. 7, 2021.  Sentencia  en españolCommunicado  en español. Official press release in English.  [states may not establish a right to life from the moment of conception in their local constitutions]

*Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación [Supreme Court] 2021, Acción de inconstitucionalidad AI 54/2018, Sept 21, 2021.   Sentencia  en españolDecision backup.    Communicado  en español.  Official press release in English.  [struck down part of the General Law regulating health services nationwide, because it established an expansive right to conscientious objection by medical personnel, without establishing the limits necessary to ensure patients’ rights to healthcare]


Corte Suprema de Nepal, Achyut Kharel v. Government of Nepal, Writ No. 3352, 2061, 2008.  Sentencia de Nepal traducidos al inglés.   Extra copia.  [law allowing abortion on request of woman within first 12 weeks upheld; no paternal consent required.]

Corte Suprema de Nepal, Annapurna Rana v. Kathmandu District Court, Writ No. 2187, 2053, 1998.  [Supreme Court declared virginity test a violation of the constitutional right to privacy; privacy over one’s body and reproductive organs is an inviolable right]

Corte Suprema de Nepal, Lakshmi Dhikta v. Government of Nepal, Writ No. 0757, 2067, Nepal Kanoon Patrika, 2009.  Sentencia y el resumen en inglésExtra copia.  [woman could not afford a legal abortion was forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy and give birth; Court held government has to guarantee safe and affordable abortion services including establishing a fund for abortion costs.]

Corte Suprema de Nepal, Meera Dhungana v. Government of Nepal, Writ No. 55, 2058, 2002.  Sentencia de Nepal traducidos al inglés Extra copia.  [Rape law is unconstitutional because it excluded marital rape; legislature to create new rape law, consistent with decision of the Court.]

Corte Suprema de Nepal, Prakash Mani Sharma v. Government of Nepal, Writ No. 064, 2008.  Sentencia de Nepal traducidos al inglésExtra copia. [Court action brought over government inaction relating to uterus prolapse; constitutional rights of reproductive health are fundamental, non-derogable, non-restrictive and require meaningful implementation by the state, not only by legislation but also by infrastructure]


Tribunal Superior de Nueva Zelanda, Right to Life New Zealand Inc. v. Abortion Supervisory Committee, [2008] 2 NZLR 825, 9 de junio de 2008. Descargar Sentencia en InglésExtra copia.  [upheld law allowing abortion if continued pregnancy would result in serious danger to woman’s life or physical and mental health; noted that law is applied more liberally than Parliament intended, so review is necessary]

Corte Suprema de Nueva Zelanda, Right to Life New Zealand Inc. v. Abortion Supervisory Committee, [2012] NZSC 68, 9 de agosto de 2012.Descargar Sentencia en InglésExtra copia.   [appeal of 2008 case dismissed; Advisory Committee could question consultants about how they were making decisions approving abortion under relevant law, but could not investigate decisions made in individual cases.]

NZ Health Professionals’ Alliance v Attorney-General, [2021] NZHC 2510 (*New Zealand High Court)   Decision online.     Commentary on decision.  [conscientious objection includes duty of effective referral; and employers must accommodate conscientious objection unless doing so would cause unreasonable disruption.]


Tribunal Constitucional, Sentencia Exp. No. 7435-2006-PC/TC, 13 de Noviembre de 2006. Sentencia en español.    Extra copia.  [Constitutional Court enforced Department of Health decision to provide emergency oral contraceptives free of charge throughout Peru, including access to the contraception and relevant information.] 

Tribunal Constitucional ONG Acción de Lucha Anticorrupción Sin Componenda c.MINSA (Ministerio de Salud), Exp. N° 02005-2009-PA/TC, 16 de octubre de 2009.  Sentencia en español (30 mb).  [Constitutional Court revoked 2006 decision; ordered Ministry of Health to stop distributing emergency contraception to the public sector.]


Tribunal Constitucional, K 26/96, Orzecznictwo Trybunału Konstytucyjnego, Rok 1997, 28 de mayo de 1997. Sentencia en polaco.   Extra copia.   Sentencia en inglés.  [abortion law allowing abortions up to 12 weeks for financial, emotional reasons struck down as unconstitutional]

Trybunal Konstitucyjny [Constitutional Tribunal]  Case No. K 1/20 (OTK ZU A/2021, item 4, October 22, 2020).  Press Release in Polish.    Auto-translation to EnglishComments by scholars, 2021. [court held unconstitutional an exception in the Family Planning Act of 1993 that provided for legal abortion in cases of fetal abnormalities. Result: almost total ban on abortion.]


Tribunal Constitucional, Acórdão No. 25/84, Acórdãos do Tribunal Constitucional II, 1984.  Sentencia en portuguésExtra copia.  [upheld law decriminalizing abortion in cases of rape, risk to the woman’s health or fetal abnormalities]

Tribunal Constitucional, Acórdão No. 85/85, Acórdãos do Tribunal Constitucional V,1985. Sentencia en portugués.    Extra copia.  [upheld law decriminalizing abortion in cases of rape, risk to the woman’s health or fetal abnormalities]

Tribunal Constitucional, Acórdão No. 288/98, Diário da República  91/98 Suplemento I-A Série, 1998. Sentencia en portuguésExtra copia.  [The referendum question asking the public whether abortion should be decriminalized within the first 10 weeks was constitutional and legal.]

Tribunal Constitucional, Acórdão No. 617/2006, Diário da República I Série, 2006..  Sentencia en portugués.    Extra copia.  [The referendum question whether abortion should be decriminalized within the first 10 weeks if completed in a legally authorized health care establishment was constitutional and legal.]

Tribunal Constitucional, Acórdão No. 75/2010, Diario da Republica vol. 60, 2010..  Sentencia en portugués. Extra copia.  [upheld as constitutional:  law allowing abortion upon request within first 10 weeks: if performed under a doctor’s direction, at an officially recognized health facility, after a mandatory information session and a 3 day reflection period.]


Tribunal Superior de Inglaterra y Gales, Queen’s Bench Division, Barr v. Matthews, (1999) 52 B.M.L.R. 217.  [doctors invoking conscientious objection should immediately refer the patient to a colleague for care]

Tribunal Superior de Inglaterra y Gales, British Pregnancy Advisory Service v Secretary of State for Health. [2011] E.W.H.C. 235 (Admin).  Sentencia en InglésExtra copia.  [interpretation of Abortion Act 1967: women must take first and second doses of pills for medical abortions in a hospital or other health facility]

Cámara de los Lores, Gillick v. West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority. 3 All E.R. 402 (1985).  Sentencia en Inglés.   Extra copia.  [doctors can provide advice and contraceptives to girls under the age of 16 without their parents' knowledge or consent]

Greater Glasgow Health Board v. Doogan and another, [2014] UKSC 68 (on appeal from [2013] CSIH 36), December 14, 2014 (UK Supreme Court)   Decision online.   News article.   [right to conscientious objection does not extend to those supervising the health professionals who perform abortions]

Tribunal Superior de Inglaterra y Gales, Queen’s Bench Division, Paton v. Trustees of British Pregnancy Advisory Service and Another [1978] QB 276 Casa Exterior, Tribunal de Sesión (Escocia) [Outer House, Court of Session, Scotland].  Sentencia en InglésExtra copia.  [husband has no right to stop his wife from obtaining an abortion]

Petition of Mary Teresa Doogan and Concepta Wood, [2012] C.S.O.H. 32. Casa Interior, División Extra, Tribunal de Sesión (Escocia)  Sentencia en inglés.   Extra copia.  [right to conscientious objection does not extend to those supervising health professionals who perform abortions]

Petition of Mary Teresa Doogan and Concepta Wood, [2013] C.S.I.H. 36. P876/11    Sentencia en inglésExtra copia.  [overturned 2012 decision, ruling that right to conscientious objection does extend to those supervising health professionals who perform abortions - (but see 2014 case: Greater Glasgow...,  above)]

R (on the Application of Crowter and Ors) v SSHSC   [2021] EWHC 2536 (Admin) Case No. CO/2066/2020 (High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, London) Sept 23, 2021.  Judgment and summary.    [fetus has no established rights under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), so UK abortion law allowing legal abortions in cases of severe fetal abnormalities is compatible with ECHR.]

Cámara de los Lores, R. (on the application of Purdy) v. Dir. of Pub. Prosecutions, [2009] U.K.H.L. 45 cámara de los Lores.  Sentencia en inglés.   Extra copia.  [Bioethical dispute (re assisted suicide), framed within European Convention of Human Rights paradigm]

Tribunal Superior de Inglaterra y Gales, Queen’s Bench Division, R. (on the application of Smeaton) v. Secretary of State for Health, [2002] E.W.H.C. 610. (Admin).  Sentencia en inglés.    Extra copia.  [prescription, supply and use of emergency contraception does not constitute a criminal offence; emergency contraceptives do not cause miscarriage, because a miscarriage is the termination of an established pregnancy]

Cámara de los Lores, R. (S.B.) v. Governors of Denbigh High School [2006] U.K.H.L. 15, [2007] 1 A.C. 100.  Sentencia en inglés.    Extra copia.  [conscientious objection: Muslim dress case - mentions potential limitation of conscientious objection: Under ICCPR article 9, a  person’s right to manifest their religious beliefs can be denied if there is a justification in a particular time and place.]

Tribunal de la Corona de Inglaterra y Gales, R. v. Bourne [1938] 3 All E.R. 615.  Resumen y Sentencia en inglésExtra copia. [doctor acquitted of performing an abortion on a 14-year-old girl who was gang raped by soldiers, because the woman's life was reasonably thought to be in danger]

Tribunal de la Corona de Inglaterra y Gales, R. v. Sarah Louise Catt [2013] EWCA Crim 1187.   Sentencia en inglés. Extra copia. [sentence of woman who pled guilty to administering poison with intent to procure a miscarriage was reduced from 8 years to 3.5 years] 

Corte de Apelaciones de Inglaterra y Gales [Court of Appeal of England and Wales] R. v. Smith [1974] 1 All E.R. 376, 381.  [jury can consider whether a doctor acted in good faith while authorizing an abortion]

Cámara de los Lores, Royal College of Nurses v. Department of Health and Social Security [1981] 1 All E.R. 545.   Sentencia en inglés.   Extra copia.  [nurses are legally protected from liability when they are involved in abortions in accordance with the 1967 Abortion Act]


División Provincial de Transvaal del Tribunal Superior, Christian Lawyers Association of South Africa & Others v. Minister of Health & Others, 1998 (4) SA 113 (T). Sentencia en inglés.   Extra copia.   [upheld law that allows abortion upon request in first trimester, and abortion up to 20 weeks on grounds of mother’s physical or mental health, severe fetal abnormalities, rape or incest, or the mother’s social or economic circumstances.]

Corte Suprema de Apelaciones, Christian Lawyers Association v. Minister of Health and Others, [2004] 4 All SA 31. Sentencia en inglésExtra copia.   [Constitutional ruling that "women" in Choice of Termination of Pregnancy Act includes girls under 18, without consent of a guardian, with counselling or a cooling off period.]


El Tribunal Constitucional del Reino de Tailandia, Sentencia no. 4 de 2563 (2020) ordena la revisión del Código Penal sección 301, que viola las Secciones 27 o 28 de la Constitución de 2017, que respaldan la igualdad de derechos entre hombres y mujeres, así como el derecho y la libertad de todos en su vida y persona. Decisión de 19 de febrero de 2020.  Sumario de Corte en ingles).   Extra copia.  [Declared unconstitutional: Criminal Code section 301, allowing a fine or up to three years in prison for a woman who had an abortion; Court ordered revision of this section.]


Mildred Mapingure v. Minister Of Home Affairs and 2 Others (2014), Judgment No. SC 22/14, Civil Appeal No. SC 406/12
(Zimbabwe, Supreme Court).  Sentencia en inglés.   Extra copia.  [police officer and doctor failed to carry out their professional duties; their delays and omissions ended up denying a rape victim an abortion]

Jurisprudencia Regional


Ahmad (X.) v. United Kingdom (1981) 4 E.H.R.R. 126.  Sentencia en Inglés.   Extra copia.  [Inadmissibility: freedom of religion is not absolute, and can be influenced by the situation of the person claiming that freedom]

Brüggemann and Scheuten v. Federal Republic of Germany, App. No. 6959/75 (1981) 3 E.H.R.R. 244.  Sentencia en Inglés. Extra copia.   [German law which criminalized abortion except under certain circumstances did not breach Article 8; a woman’s private life becomes closely connected with the developing fetus]

Church of Scientology v. Sweden, App. No. 7805/77, 16 Eur. Comm’n. H.R. Dec. and Rep. 68 (1979), Sentencia en Inglés..  Extra copia.  [Inadmissible, since the advertising prohibitions restricted its commercial freedom, not its freedom of religion]

Hercz (R.H.) v. Norway, App. No. 17004/90,Eur. Comm’n H.R. (1992).  Sentencia en InglésExtra copia.  [man's complaint that his partner had an abortion notwithstanding his objection to the procedure was declared inadmissible]

Paton (W.P.) v. United Kingdom, App. No. 8416/78, Eur. Comm’n H.R. (1980).  Sentencia en InglésExtra copia.  [man's application surrounding his partner having an abortion without his consent declared inadmissible; Commission noted that this claim was manifestly ill-founded and the woman had the abortion to protect her own life]

X v. Austria, App. No. 7045/75, Eur. Comm’n H.R. (1976).  Sentencia en Inglés.   Extra copia.  [Application which challenged Austrian penal code decriminalizing abortion within first three months was ruled inadmissible, because the applicant, being male, did not have standing] 

X v. Norway, App. No. 867/60, Eur. Comm’n H.R. (1961).  [Inadmissible for lack of standing; petitioner could not claim to be a "victim".]


Caso 13-378, Informe No. 09/20, Beatriz v. El Salvador, Inter-Am. C.H.R. (2020)  Sentencia en espanolExtra copia.. Submitted to Inter-American Court of Human Rights Jan. 5, 2022. Sumario en EspanolComunicado Prensa en espanol. [Woman with lupus and kidney failure denied abortion for fetus with anencephaly.] 

Informe Nº21/07, Petición 161-02, Solución Amistosa, Paulina del Carmen Ramirez Jacinto contra México, 9 de marzo de 2007.  Sentencia en español.     Extra copia.  [Mexico denied a raped minor a legal abortion; friendly settlement reached.]

Resolución No. 23/81, Caso 2141 (“Baby Boy”) interpuesto por los Sres. White y Potter contra los Estados Unidos de América, OAS/Ser.L/V/II.54, doc. 9 rev. 1, 6 de marzo de 1981.  Sentencia en español Extra copia.    [Abortion scheme in US did not violate the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man nor the American Convention on Human Rights; right to life does not begin at conception in the Declaration, which prevails over the wording in the Convention.]

Medida Cautelar MC -270/09 otorgada a favor de X y XX contra Colombia, 21 de septiembre de 2009.,   Resumen en español.     Medida cautelares en espanol.  [Inadmissible for lack of standing; petitioner could not claim to be a "victim".]  [Precautionary measures granted to protect a mother and daughter in Colombia; daughter had been sexually assaulted and was carrying a high-risk pregnancy. Both mother and daughter had been subject to threats, physical aggression and a kidnapping attempt after reporting the assault.]


Caso Artavia Murillo y otros (Fecundación in vitro) vs. Costa Rica, Sentencia de 28 de noviembre de 2012. Serie C No. 257.  Sentencia en españolExtra copia.   [Costa Rica violated the right to private and family life, right to protection of family and equality before law by banning in-vitro fertilization; right to life in American Convention is not absolute, but rather gradual, aligning with stages of fetal development.]


A, B, and C v. Ireland, [2010] E.C.H.R. 2032, Sentencia en InglésExtra copia.  [Ireland's restrictive abortion law did not violate the ECHR. However, Ireland's failure to adopt legislation and effective and accessible procedure for women to access lawful abortions under that scheme was a violation of Article 8]

Airey v. Ireland, [1979] 2 E.H.R.R. 305.  Sentencia en InglésExtra copia.  [Commission found that barriers to a woman's quest to obtain a judicial separation from an abusive husband amounted to a violation of Article 6 and 8 "The Convention is intended to guarantee not rights that are theoretical or illusory but rights that are practical and effective." cited byJoanna Erdman page 132, note 73, to Illustrate the ECHR's turn to positive obligations and procedural rights.]

Belgian Linguistic Case (No. 2) (1968) 1 E.H.R.R. 252.   Sentencia en español.  Sentencia en InglésExtra copia.  [The European Convention is considered subsidiary to national laws by competent national authorities, cited by Joanna Erdman p.130, note 56.]

Boso v. Italy, App. No. 50490/99,Eur. Ct. H.R. (2002).  Sentencia en InglésExtra copia.  [Inadmissible: complaint of a man whose wife had had a legal abortion without his consent; a man's rights to private and family life and right to marriage and family yield to the mother's rights because she is the primary person impacted by a pregnancy]

Costa and Pavan v. Italy, No. 54270/10, 28th August 2012, Sentencia en Inglés.  Extra copiaComment by Adriana StephanoAcademic article by Gregor Puppinck.  [re assisted reproduction and abortion for healthy carriers of cystic fibrosis]  

D. v. Ireland, App. No. 26499/02, Eur. Ct. H.R. (2006).  Sentencia en Inglés.    Extra copia.  [Health insurance denied claim of woman who travelled to UK for abortion; case declared inadmissible because she did not exhaust domestic remedies regarding the availability of abortion in Ireland in cases of fatal fetal abnormality]

Grimmark v. Sweden,   App. No. 43726/17, Eur. Ct. H.R. (2020)  Sentencia en Inglés Extra copia.  [Sweden's decision not to hire midwives who refused to participate in abortions complied with Article 9, since the freedom to manifest one's religious beliefs is subject to qualifications; applicant's complaint was deemed inadmissible]

Kiyutin v. Russia, App. No. 2700/10, Eur. Ct. H.R. (2011).  Sentencia en español Extra copiaSentencia en Inglés.  [Russia's refusal of a residence permit to an HIV+ man to live his wife and child violated the right to nondiscrimination in the exercise of private life; example of stereotyping and stigmatization cited by Rebecca Cook, pp 366-367.]

Marckx v. Belgium, (1979) 2 E.H.R.R. 330.  Resumen en español. Sentencia en espanol..   Extra copiaSentencia en Inglés.  [Belgian law where there was no legal bond between an unmarried mother and a child violated Article 8 as it created lesser inheritance and intestate rights to "illegitimate" children when compared to children born within marriages.] [Example of how the Court reads implicit positive obligations in Article 8, which guarantees a right to respect for private life, mentioned by Joanna Erdman, p137, at note 95.]

Open Door Counselling and Dublin Well Woman v. Ireland, App. Nos. 14234/88 and14235/88, Eur. Ct. H.R. (1992). Sentencia en español Extra copia.   Sentencia en Inglés.  [restrictions that prevented two non-governmental organizations from informing pregnant women about abortion clinics in Great Britain were deemed a violation of freedom of expression in Article 10; Ireland sought to rely on the right to life in Article 2 which the Commission found did not apply]

P. and S. v. Poland, App. No. 57375/08, Eur. Ct. H.R. (2012).  Sentencia en InglésExtra copia. [Poland violated rights of a minor who sought a legal abortion after rape. Minor was subjected to: doctor’s refusal to help and refusal to provide a referral; distorted information about the law; detention in a juvenile centre, and disclosure of the minor’s personal and medical data to the press; Minor and her mother were harassed by doctors, anti-abortion groups, and representatives of the Catholic church]

Pichon and Sajous v. France, Case No. 49853/99, Eur. Ct. H.R. (2001).  Sentencia en Inglés.    Extra copia.   Sentencia en francés.     Extra copia.  [pharmacist complaint inadmissible; pharmacists cannot, based on their religious beliefs, refuse to sell contraceptives that have been prescribed by doctor]

Caso Pretty v. Reino Unido, 35 Eur. Ct. H.R. Rep. 1 (2002). Sentencia en español.   Extra copia.  Sentencia en Inglés.  [re: assisted dying, an example of a dispute about bioethical legislation framed within a human rights paradigm] chapter by Sally Sheldon, page 190, note 4.]

R.R. v. Poland, App. No. 27617/04, Eur. Ct. H.R. (2011).  Sentencia en InglésExtra copia.  [Poland violated applicant’s rights to freedom from inhumane and degrading treatment and respect for private life by denying her timely access to diagnostic tests and information which would have enabled her to decide whether or not to seek a legal abortion; due to such delays, the woman gave birth to a child with Turner syndrome]

S. and Marper v. United Kingdom, App. Nos. 30562/04 and 30566, Eur. Ct. H.R. (2008).  Sentencia en InglésExtra copia.  [keeping DNA samples in national databases after a person has been acquitted of a crime is a violation of article 8; shows how risk of stigmatization can interfere with patients' right to private life] {in Cook, p.365, note 131}

S.L. v. Austria, App. No. 45330/99, Eur. Ct. H.R. (2003). Sentencia en InglésExtra copia.  [law criminalizing same sex activity between someone who is 14-18 with someone over the age of 19 was a violation of Article 14 in conjunction with Article 8; example of how risk of stigmatization can interfere with patients' right to private life] {in Cook,  p.359n98, 365,n132}

Tysiąc v. Poland, 45 E.H.R.R. 42 (2007). Sentencia en Inglés.     Extra copia.  [Poland violated Article 8 rights of a woman who was denied access to a legal abortion due to risk to her health; she was forced to give birth and her health was negatively impacted as a result]

Vo v. France, App. No. 53924/00, 40 E.H.R.R. 12 (2004).  Sentencia en Inglés.   Extra copia.  [applicant awarded damages for medical negligence which resulted in the loss of her pregnancy; Court decided not to rule on whether an unborn child is protected under Article 2]

Z. v. Poland, App. No. 46132/08, Eur. Ct. H. R. (2012).  Sentencia en InglésExtra copia.  [no violations found in case of a woman repeatedly denied medical care for a condition she contracted while pregnant, since doctors feared that treatment would harm the fetus; result: both the mother and the fetus died]


Confederazione Generale Italiana del Lavoro (CGIL) v. Italy (2016), Complaint No. 91/2013 (European Committee on Social Rights, Strasbourg, France)  Sentencia en linea.   Extra copia.  [Italy violated the right to work and the right to dignity in work as doctors who did not conscientiously object to abortion had most of their workload consist of abortion care which had the effect of restricting other career opportunities and prospects.]

International Planned Parenthood European Network v. Italy (2014), Complaint No. 87/2012, decision published 10 March 2014 (European Committee on Social Rights, Strasbourg, France) Sentencia en linea.   Extra copia.  [Italy violated the right to health: abortion laws were discriminatory as the only women who were guaranteed access to legal abortion were ones who could afford to travel to various hospitals and regions of the country to seek this health service.]


Tribunal de Apelación de África Oriental, Mehar Singh Bansel v. R., (1959) E.A.L.R. 813.   Descargar Sentencia en Inglés.    Extra copia. [upheld doctor's conviction of manslaughter for abortion-related death]

Tribunal de Apelación de Africa Occidental, R. v. Edgal, Idike and Ojugwu, (1938) W.A.C.A. 133.  [upheld convictions of three Nigerians convicted for providing anything which is intended to procure a miscarriage, after court applied English Bourne case]

Jurisprudencia Internacional

Comité de Derechos Humanos

Comunicación 1153/2003, K.L. v. Perú, Decisión de 17 de noviembre de 2005, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/85/D/1153/2003.  Sentencia en españolExtra copia..   Sentencia en Inglés.    [Peru violated 17-year-old girl's rights. Minor was pregnant with anencephalic fetus and was denied a legal abortion; she was forced to give birth and developed severe depression following infant's death four days after birth. Violations included right to be free from cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment, right to privacy and special measures for the protection of minors.]      

Comunicación Nº1608/2007, L.M.R. v. Argentina, Decisión de 28 de abril de 2011, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/101/D/1608/2007.. Sentencia en español.   Extra copia.   [Raped woman with a mental disability experienced significant delay in trying to obtain a legal abortion; by the time she could obtain an abortion it was denied on the basis that the pregnancy was too advanced which caused LMR to seek an illegal abortion. The delays and obstacles in trying to obtain a legal abortion were violations of equality and non-discrimination, right to be free from torture or cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment and right to privacy.]

Amanda Jane Mellet v. Ireland, CCPR/C/116/D/2324/2013, March 31, 2017, published November 17, 2016 (United Nations, Human Rights Committee).  Sentencia. Extra copia en español.    [Woman was forced to travel to obtain an abortion as Ireland banned abortion in cases of fatal fetal abnormality. Ireland's law was found in violation of the ICCPR and the government was asked to change its law.]

Siobhàn Whelan v. Ireland, Comm. No. 2425/2014:  Ireland 12/06/2017, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/119/D/2425/2014 (UN Human Rights Committee), 12 June 2017, [Woman forced to travel to the UK for an abortion after fatal fetal abnormality diagnosis.  Abortion laws are "cruel and inhumane."]  Sentencia en linea.   Extra copia en español.    Sentencia en ingles.   [Woman forced to travel to the UK for an abortion after fatal fetal abnormality diagnosis. Abortion laws are "cruel and inhumane".]

 Comité para la Eliminación de la Discriminación contra la Mujer

Comunicación N° 22/2009. L.C. v. Perú, Decisión de 17 de octubre de 2011. U.N. Doc.: CEDAW/C/50/D/22/2009,  Sentencia en español.     Extra copia.   [Sexually-abused minor attempted to commit suicide; the attempt left her paralyzed and needing surgery.  The surgery was delayed once it was discovered she was pregnant, and she was denied access to a legal abortion.  The minor remained paralyzed after she finally had access to her surgery. Peru had violated a number of articles including the right to health, freedom from discrimination, and freedom from sex role stereotyping and prejudice.]