The aim of this article is to answer the question whether the non-recognition of the birth certificates of same-sex couples in Poland can be treated as a violation of the right not to be discriminated against on grounds of sexual orientation, which is a fundamental right under EU law. Could such discrimination be manifested, for example, by unequal treatment of children who have only been given a PESEL number? Furthermore, what are the consequences of treating EU citizens differently and how does this affect their civil status in Poland? Using a dogmatic research method, the authors analyse both EU and Polish regulations concerning the problem of recognising a foreign birth certificate, highlighting the shortcomings as well as the advantages of the existing solutions.

In the judgment in case C-490/20 of 14.12.2021 r. V.M.A. v. Stolichna, "Pancharevo", the Court of Justice ruled that EU member states are obliged to recognize – for the purposes of EU free movement law – family ties established in another EU member state between a child and his or her same-sex parents. The V.M.A. ruling can be seen as a first step toward full recognition of rainbow families in Europe. However, due to the lack of clarification by the Court of a number of key concepts in this area, such as the scope of the principle of recognition or the scope of rights under Art. 21 TFEU, the judgment does not solve many important problems, and therefore its practical application may cause difficulties.

The Court of Justice in the Veselibas ministrija case made an attempt to assess to what extent, when implementing EU law in the area of cross-border healthcare, Member States are obliged to take into account not only the provisions of EU law on the implementation of the internal market, but also the personal choice of the patient resulting from religious beliefs, which results from the Article 21 paragraph 1 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Unfortunately, the arguments adopted by the Court in the judgment show that the implementation of the general interest (protection of public health) outweighs the interest of the individual (the right not to be discriminated against on the basis of religion or belief). The Tribunal does not notice the values of the Union and goals other than the economic goal of the European Union. The aim of the analysis is to draw attention to the axiological aspect in the implementation of the fundamental right, which is the right to not be discriminated against on grounds of religion under Article 21 paragraph 1 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the area of patient's right in cross-border healthcare.