Bulgaria's Supreme Court approves legal gender recognition for four transgender people

For the first time since 2020, Bulgaria's highest civil court has ruled in favour of transgender applicants seeking to change their gender markers and names — and the legal reasoning points directly to a March 2026 CJEU decision that is reshaping what EU member states can lawfully refuse.

Bulgaria's Supreme Court of Cassation (SCC) has issued four rulings allowing transgender people to legally update their gender markers and names in civil status records — the first decisions of this kind since 2020, when the court's practice was effectively suspended following years of legal uncertainty.

The decisions follow a March 2026 ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Shipov (C-43/24), which found that EU law prohibits member states from blocking changes to gender-related personal data in official records when doing so conflicts with European legal principles. The Luxembourg court held that national courts cannot apply domestic interpretations of law that create obstacles contrary to EU law.

Six years of legal paralysis

The issue has been contested in Bulgarian courts for years. In 2021, the Constitutional Court ruled that the term "gender" in the Bulgarian Constitution should be understood in a strictly biological sense, limiting gender marker changes to intersex individuals. Two years later, the SCC's Civil Chamber issued an interpretative ruling holding that existing law did not permit courts to approve changes for transgender applicants without a specific legislative framework.

That 2023 ruling effectively suspended cases that had been pending for years. One applicant had been waiting since 2017. The CJEU's intervention in 2026 changed the legal landscape: the Luxembourg court ruled that a person who has exercised the EU right to free movement cannot be prevented from updating their gender identity data in official records. National courts, it added, cannot be bound by a constitutional court's interpretation of national law where that interpretation runs counter to EU law.

The four cases

The first case involved K.M.H., whose legal battle began in 2017 after requesting a change of gender and names in a birth certificate in Stara Zagora. After years of refusals at municipal and court level, the case reached the SCC in 2020 and became a focal point for the wider legal debate. The SCC panel ruled that gender identity forms part of personal identity and is protected by the right to privacy under the European Convention on Human Rights.

The court also stated that this right applies to transgender people regardless of whether they undergo medical treatment related to gender transition — a significant departure from approaches that have made surgery or hormone therapy a condition of legal recognition.

A second case, R.H.Y., involved a request to change gender data from female to male. Previous refusals by local courts were overturned after the SCC examined the CJEU ruling.

In a third case, P.M.M. had been waiting since 2022 for a decision. The SCC rejected earlier refusals and approved the change, citing psychological and forensic evidence alongside testimony demonstrating the permanent nature of the applicant's gender identity. The court applied criteria previously used before the 2023 interpretative ruling.

In the fourth case, A.D.K.'s request was initially refused but later approved by the Plovdiv District Court. When the SCC declined to reopen the case, it effectively confirmed that decision in the applicant's favour.

What the court said about EU law

Running through all four rulings is a clear statement of constitutional hierarchy: EU law takes precedence over conflicting national interpretations, and Bulgarian courts must apply European legal standards when interpreting domestic legislation. The SCC stated explicitly that Bulgaria, as an EU member state, must ensure transgender citizens can exercise their rights to free movement and residence — including access to procedures allowing official documents to reflect gender identity.

The court also held that the public interest in accurate civil registers cannot serve as grounds for refusal, but rather as a reason to ensure records accurately reflect a person's legal and social identity. And it confirmed that legal recognition cannot be made conditional on surgical procedures — in line with longstanding guidance from the European Court of Human Rights.

What this means

These four decisions effectively restore the SCC's pre-2023 practice and establish a new legal direction grounded in EU law and European human rights standards. They do not resolve Bulgaria's lack of a dedicated legislative framework — that remains absent — but they confirm that courts can and must act even in its absence.

The decisions also illustrate the ongoing importance of CJEU referrals in jurisdictions where domestic courts have been unwilling or unable to protect transgender rights. The Shipov ruling itself began as a referral from Bulgaria's Supreme Court of Cassation — and it has now unblocked years of pending applications.

For Lavender Common, the cases underline why sustained strategic litigation — including third-party intervention and referral to supranational courts — remains one of the most effective tools available where legislative change has stalled.

Source: Novinite / Sofia News Agency, 22 July 2026