header-logo header-logo

01 August 2014 / James Wilson
Issue: 7617 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Crossing boundaries

backpage_law-stories

James Wilson revisits the landmark discrimination case of Constantine v Imperial Hotel

One of the best-known discrimination cases in recent years concerned the proprietors of a B&B wanting to impose conditions on the rooms they were prepared to let to guests. In Bull v Hall [2013] UKSC 73, the Supreme Court eventually ruled that the proprietors were not permitted lawfully to refuse to let a room with a double bed to a same-sex couple, despite the proprietors’ sincerely-held religious beliefs about marriage. The ruling was not without controversy, but it was certainly not disputed that as a general proposition people should not be discriminated against on the basis of arbitrary factors such as gender, orientation or race.

Seven decades ago, however, things were rather different. None of the modern legal weapons against such discrimination existed. Thus, when the famous cricketer Learie Constantine was turned away from a hotel during the Second World War for no reason other than the colour of his skin, his remedies at law were much more limited. But he went on

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
In this week’s NLJ, Fred Philpott, Gough Square Chambers, invites us to imagine there was no statutory limitation. What would that world be like?
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
back-to-top-scroll