Decision of the Higher Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main dated 01.04.2026
The Higher Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main had to rule on the scope of a right to information in connection with a sperm donation. The subject of the proceedings was whether a child resulting from a sperm donation could demand that the treating or documenting entity provide information on how often the genetic material of the biological father was used and how many half-siblings were thereby created.
The presentation is based on the report on the proceedings at the Higher Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main (Case No. 17 U 60/24), published on urteile.news, accessible at: https://urteile.news/OLG-Frankfurt-am-Main_17-U-6024_Kein-Anspruch-auf-Auskunft-ueber-Anzahl-der-Verwendung-von-Samenspenden-des-biologischen-Vaters-und-Anzahl-der-Halbgeschwister~N35877.
Subject of the dispute: Information on usage frequency and half-siblings
Request for further information
The focus of the procedure was not the identity of the donor as such, but additional information regarding the use of the donation. It concerned information that extended beyond the determination of genetic descent and specifically addressed the number of treatments initiated by the same donor and the resulting number of genetically related half-siblings.
Classification of the requested information
Such information can, depending on the case configuration, affect both the private interests of the child and the concerns of the donor, as well as other third-party interests worthy of protection. The court therefore had to determine whether and to what extent there was a right to disclosure of this quantitative information.
Legal assessment: No right to the requested information
Distinction from the right to knowledge of ancestry
The Higher Regional Court did not affirm the claim to the extent desired by the plaintiff according to the reported content. The decisive factor was the distinction between the recognized interest in knowing one’s own biological origin and additional information that does not directly concern identity determination but aims to capture usage and relationship data broadly.
No extension to quantitative usage data
According to the reported line of decision-making, the right to know one’s own ancestry does not automatically establish a claim to know the number of uses of the genetic material or the number of possibly existing half-siblings. The court thus rejected an extension of the scope of information to include these additional data.
Significance of the decision for practice
Scope of rights to information in the context of sperm donation
The decision, according to the published report, illustrates that requests for information in the context of medically assisted reproduction can be subject to clear substantive limitations. The boundary therefore lies where information no longer serves to clarify one’s identity but concerns more extensive statistical or relational insights into the use of the donation and the number of genetically related persons.
Awareness of conflicting protected interests
Such proceedings regularly involve conflicting interests, such as informational interests, data protection obligations, and the personal rights of the individuals involved. The decision is classified in the published report as indicating that the right to information is not without limits.
Classification by MTR Legal
The decision of the Higher Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main (01.04.2026, Case No. 17 U 60/24) shows that courts differentiate between the interest in knowledge of ancestry and further information requests when it comes to information claims regarding sperm donations. Which information may be owed in individual cases depends on the specific circumstances and the applicable legal basis.
Anyone with legal questions about rights to information, documentation obligations, or data protection restrictions in connection with reproductive medical treatments can find more information at MTR Legal on Legal advice in family law.
