JM v United Kingdom [2010] ECHR 37060/06, [2010] All ER (D) 51 (Oct)
For an issue to arise under Art 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights, there had to be a difference in the treatment of persons in relevantly similar situations, such difference being based on one of the grounds expressly or implicitly covered by that provision.
Such a difference in treatment would be discriminatory if it lacked reasonable and objective justification, that was to say it did not pursue a legitimate aim, or if there was no reasonable relationship of proportionality between the means employed and the aim pursued.
There was a margin of appreciation for states in assessing whether and to what extent differences in otherwise similar situations justified a different treatment, and that margin was usually wide when it came to general measures of economic or social strategy. However, where the complaint was one of discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation, the margin of appreciation would be narrow. The state had to be able to point to particularly convincing and weighty reasons to justify such a difference in treatment.
