Sophia Kuhnke is a law student at Università Bocconi School of Law and a JURIST correspondent covering recent developments in Italy. 

On Tuesday, the 12th of May, the Bari Court of Appeal (Corte di Appello di Bari) in southern Italy delivered a ruling legally recognising three parents for a four-year-old. 

This case, serving as a landmark case within Italy, revolves around a four-year-old child who was born in Germany and lives with a same-sex couple. This couple consists of the biological father, a citizen of Germany, and a non-biological father who is Italo-German. The child’s biological mother is said to be a close friend of the two fathers. 

The child had been adopted by the non-biological father under German law, who then applied for the adoption to also be legally recognised in Italy. After receiving and reviewing the application from the fathers, the local authority of Apulia rejected their request, explaining that the child was born from surrogacy carried out abroad. 

The reason that this was a point of concern was due to the fact that surrogacy has been a controversial topic for many years within Italy. According to the General Consulate of Italy, under Law No. 169 of 4 November 2024, “the crime of surrogacy committed by an Italian citizen even abroad can be prosecuted and punished in accordance with Italian law.”

As of 2024, Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s conservative government criminalised surrogacy, describing it as “inhumane” and explaining that “human life has no price and is not a commodity to be exchanged”. Law No. 169 subjects those who enter into a surrogacy agreement to up to two years in prison as well as a monetary penalty between €600,000 and €1 million, while making it a universal crime, meaning that individuals may also be punished for having a child through surrogacy in a foreign country.

After being rejected, the case was brought to a court of appeal in the southern Italian city of Bari, and the ruling made in Apulia was overturned. The final ruling recognised that there were no specific surrogacy agreements in the family. This is supported by the statement made by the lawyer of one of the boy’s fathers, Pasqua Manfredi, who stated that, “There was no secret surrogacy deal here, this case is a case of three people who all wanted to be the parents of this child, and the court recognised this.”

The reason this is a landmark case is due to the fact that it involves a pivotal court decision establishing a new legal principle: the legal recognition of three parents. This ruling follows the 10th anniversary of the legal recognition of same-sex partnerships, also a significant decision made by the Italian government. 

While considered a landmark case, this case touches on a truly relevant and modern topic of discussion. This includes the question of the legality of surrogacy as well as concerns from the conservative parties. Specifically, Pro Vita & Famiglia, a Catholic group that is known for supporting what they call “traditional family values,” has shown discontent with the ruling and acknowledgement of same-sex unions, explaining that they “expose minors to all kinds of social and ideological experimentations.”

This ruling raises important social and legal questions regarding the recognition of non-traditional family structures in Italy. While the Court of Appeal focuses its attention greatly on the interest of the child and the environment in which it is to grow and develop, there is a crossover with Italy’s strict rules on surrogacy, specifically conflicting with the introduction of the 2024 laws that penalise surrogacy even when carried out abroad. This introduces a tension between two legal frameworks: Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which guarantees the right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence, and the national policy concerns of Italy that relate to surrogacy. 

This case also highlights growing cross-border trends across Europe, those which do not automatically fit into traditional legal categories. It focuses on the social reality of family life over traditional, rigid legal standards. This being said, such cases reveal inconsistencies in the Italian legal system, where cases are dealt with differently depending on how they are legally framed and presented. 

Furthermore, this case represents the divide of opinions on such topics that are increasingly becoming a prominent topic of discussion. While the conservative parties and government describe surrogacy as ethically problematic, those who are impacted by the discussion are faced with legal uncertainty. 

Since Italy has yet to fully adapt its laws to recognise new family structures and dynamics, in the short term, the ruling may remain a singular decision made by the court. This being said, it is most likely that such cases will continue to arise in the future, which may create growing pressure on lawmakers. While individuals bring these cases to court, it is important that countries are able to adapt their legal frameworks in order to cover modern discussions and to create guidelines that may be applicable in a range of cases. In future conflicts, it is important that a balance between European human rights standards, national law, and social change can be established and maintained in order to determine whether this case becomes a broader precedent or remains a case of singular exception.