Bull & Bull v Hall & Preddy [2012] EWCA Civ 83 (10 February 2012)

Bull & Bull v Hall & Preddy [2012] EWCA Civ 83 (10 February 2012)

The refusal to provide a double-bedded room to the respondents, a homosexual couple in a civil partnership, constituted direct discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation under the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007. The policy, though framed in terms of marital status, was necessarily linked to sexual orientation because homosexual couples could not marry (at the relevant time) and thus could never comply with the restriction. The Regulations, as applied, were compatible with the ECHR, as the limitation on the appellants' manifestation of religious belief was necessary and proportionate to protect the rights of others. The appellants' religious beliefs did not justify...

Citation
[2012] EWCA Civ 83
Parties
Appellant: Bull & Bull; Respondent: Hall; Respondent: Preddy
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Direct Discrimination, Indirect Discrimination, Sexual Orientation, Provision of Goods and Services, Religious Freedom, Civil Partnerships, Equality Act (sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007, European Convention on Human Rights
Equality Law Human Rights Law Discrimination Law Direct Discrimination Indirect Discrimination Sexual Orientation Provision of Goods and Services Religious Freedom +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bull & Bull

Appellant

Hall

Respondent

Preddy

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether refusal to provide a double-bedded room to a homosexual couple in a civil partnership constitutes direct or indirect discrimination under the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007
  2. 2 Whether the Regulations, as applied, are compatible with Articles 8, 9, and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
  3. 3 Whether the manifestation of religious belief can justify discrimination in the provision of commercial services

Ratio Decidendi

The refusal to provide a double-bedded room to the respondents, a homosexual couple in a civil partnership, constituted direct discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation under the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007. The policy, though framed in terms of marital status, was necessarily linked to sexual orientation because homosexual couples could not marry (at the relevant time) and thus could never comply with the restriction. The Regulations, as applied, were compatible with the ECHR, as the limitation on the appellants' manifestation of religious belief was necessary and proportionate to protect the rights of others. The appellants' religious beliefs did not justify...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Declaration of direct discrimination against the respondents affirmed
  • Damages for injury to feelings of £1,800 for each respondent upheld