Judge Who Sided With Gay Couple over Christian B&B Owners Now Accepts Religious Rights
21 Jun 2014
The Supreme Court judge who ruled against a Christian couple who refused a room in their bed and breakfast established to a gay couple appears to have performed an about-face in her decision on the case.
Thought it is too late for these particular defendants,
Baroness Hale's recent comments claiming there should be a 'conscience
clause' in law for religiously motivated breaches of anti-discrimination
law may set an interesting precedent for the future.
The case erupted when in 2008, B&B owners Peter and
Hazelmary Bull accepted a booking for a double room from Steven Preddy,
believing him to be coming with his wife. When Preddy arrived at the
Chymorvah House in Cornwall, to the surprise of the religious hoteliers,
he was instead accompanied by his gay partner Martyn Hall.
The proprietors made it clear they could not give Preddy
and Hall a double room due to religious reasons and proceeded to turn
them away. Subsequently, the gay couple was awarded £3,600 in
compensation, after court proceedings which found the Bulls to be in
breach of anti-discrimination law.
The Bulls appealed against the court’s verdict in a string
of cases which ended up in the Supreme Court. There they finally lost
their case after a panel of judges, led by the court's deputy president
Baroness Hale, ruled that the rights of the gay couple should take
precedence over the conscience of the Christian couple.
But since then Lady Hale appears to have had second
thoughts. In March she told a conference at Yale Law School that laws
ignoring Christian perspectives were flawed: "I find it hard to believe
that the hard line EU law approach to direct discrimination can be
sustainable in the long run."
And in a speech given to Irish lawyers earlier this week,
she asked whether courts would do better to take a "more nuanced
approach" in such cases, perhaps developing a ‘conscience clause’ for
Christians.
Responding to complaints for Christians about "new forms
of unfair treatment", Lady Hale asked: "Should we be developing in both
human rights and EU law an explicit requirement upon providers of
employment, goods and services to make reasonable accommodation for the
manifestation of religious beliefs?"
Significantly, Lady Hale last week made the unusual ruling
that the Bulls should not be liable for the legal costs of their
Supreme Court case - sparing them the Christian couple a huge bill which
might otherwise have put them out of business.
Last year, the Bulls were nearly forced to sell their
hotel. But they have managed to stay in business thanks to support from
well-wishers.
No comments:
Post a Comment