Gay couple cannot be lawfully discriminated against by hoteliers, Court of Appeal rules
10th February 2012
Christian hotel owners have been told by the Court of Appeal that their policy of not allowing gay couples to occupy double bedded rooms in their hotel is discriminatory.
Martyn Hall and Steven Preddy won a discrimination claim earlier last year against the Christian hotel owners who had banned them from occupying a double room in the hotel on grounds of the couple's homosexuality.
The Bristol County Court ruled in January 2011 that the couple had been subject to direct discrimination in relation to their sexual orientation. The court also said that had it been necessary it would have found indirect discrimination. It stated: "...the only conclusion which can be drawn is that the refusal to allow them to occupy the double room which they had booked was because of their sexual orientation and the prima facie they fall within the provision of regulation 3 (1) and that this is direct discrimination."
The hotel owners refused the room to the couple, who had entered a civil partnership, as their policy was that only mixed sex married couples could have double rooms on the grounds of their devout Christian views.
Cloisters' equality barrister, Jason Galbraith-Marten, commented: "This is an important case and looks at the conflict between the right to manifest religious beliefs and the rights of others to equal treatment. The Court of Appeal has decided, in effect, that religious rights do not outweigh the rights of others in protected groups unless there is a specific legal provision to that effect and that where legislation has drawn a specific and clear dividing line this must be respected. The other key point of interest in this case is that it shows that as far as protection from discrimination is concerned gay couples in a civil partnership have the same rights in practice as married straight couples. The distinction between civil partnership and marriage in law is looking ever more slight!"
Cloisters' barristers Robin Allen QC and Catherine Casserley represented the couple and were instructed by the Equality and Human Rights Commission in this landmark sexual orientation discrimination case.