header-logo header-logo

01 March 2012
Issue: 7503 / Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

Sex discrimination—Sexual orientation—Hotel policy

Hall and another v Bull and another [2012] EWCA Civ 83, [2012] All ER (D) 73 (Feb)

Court of Appeal, Civil Division, Sir Andrew Morritt C, Hooper and Rafferty LJJ, 10 Feb 2012

The refusal by devoutly religious hoteliers to let a double-bedded room to a homosexual couple constituted direct discrimination under the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007, (SI 2007/1263), (the 2007 Regulations) and, to the extent which the 2007 Regulations limit the manifestation of the hoteliers’ religious beliefs, the limitations are necessary in a democratic society for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Robin Allen QC and Catherine Casserley (instructed by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission) for the claimants. James Dingemans QC and Sarah Crowther (instructed by Aughton Ainsworth) for the defendants.

The defendants were hoteliers and were devoutly religious. The claimants were in a homosexual relationship. They booked a double-bedded room at the defendants’ hotel. The defendants let single-bedded and twin-bedded rooms to anyone, regardless of marital status or sexual orientation, but only let double-bedded rooms to married couples. This policy was freely advertised

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll