G.T.B. v. SPAIN JUDGMENT of the possibility for each individual to approach others in order to establish and develop relationships with them and with the outside world (see Bărbulescu v. Romania [GC], no. 61496/08, § 71, 5 September 2017, and Botta v. Italy, 24 February 1998, § 32, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-I). The Court has already recognised that measures taken in the field of education may, in certain circumstances, affect the right to respect for private life (see F.O. v. Croatia, no. 29555/13, § 81, 22 April 2021). 85. The Court observes that the applicant was able to enrol in various educational institutions and that the legislation provides for free and equal access to primary and secondary education. His complaint relates to the issues he had in obtaining certificates or in enrolling in further training courses while he was serving sentences as a juvenile offender. The Court acknowledges that obtaining birth registration is closely linked not only to the right to private life, but also to the potential realization of other rights, and that it can have profound consequences for children’s enjoyment of their rights with regard to protection, nationality, access to social and health services, and education (see paragraphs 79 and 80 above). Notwithstanding the above, by virtue of the jura novit curia principle the Court is not bound by the legal grounds adduced by the applicant under the Convention and the Protocols thereto and has the power to decide on the characterisation to be given in law to the facts of a complaint by examining it under Articles or provisions of the Convention that are different from those relied upon by the applicant (see Radomilja and Others v. Croatia [GC], nos. 37685/10 and 22768/12, § 126, 20 March 2018). Accordingly, the Court considers it appropriate to analyse the complaints concerning the applicant’s access to education as just one aspect of his more general complaint under Article 8 of the Convention. II. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 8 OF THE CONVENTION 86. The applicant complained that the delay and the obstacles faced in the procedure to have his birth registered to be able to obtain an ID card had amounted to a violation of his right to respect for his private life, provided in Article 8 of the Convention, which reads as follows: Article 8. Right to respect for private and family life “1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. 2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.” 23