The issues that arise on this appeal are whether the Upper Tribunal in OO (Algeria)
wrongly equated persecution with a risk of being subjected to physical violence and
also failed to consider, cumulatively, the impact of the treatment that gay men would
face in Algeria. Further, the appeal raises the issues of whether it would be unduly
harsh to require the appellant to relocate within Algeria or whether returning him to
Algeria would amount to a disproportionate interference with his rights under Article
8 of the Convention given that he would conceal his sexual orientation if he returned
to live in Algeria.
The case concerned a transgender man from Iran who had obtained asylum in Hungary but could not
legally change his gender and name in that country.
The Court noted that the domestic system for gender recognition had excluded the applicant simply
because he did not have a birth certificate from Hungary, a change in the birth register being the
way name and gender changes were legally recognised.
The Court concluded that a fair balance had not been struck between the public interest and the
applicant’s right to respect for his private life owing to the refusal to give him access to the legal
gender recognition procedure.