header-logo header-logo

12 January 2022
Issue: 7962 / Categories: Legal News , Discrimination , Human rights
printer mail-detail

‘Gay cake’ claim ruled inadmissible

A seven-year legal dispute about whether a Belfast bakery unlawfully discriminated by refusing a cake decoration request has stalled after the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled the claim inadmissible

In 2014, Gareth Lee, a gay man, asked Ashers Baking Co to decorate a cake with the words ‘Support Gay Marriage’. Ashers refused on the basis gay marriage was against their Christian beliefs.

Lee brought a claim for discrimination under secondary legislation prohibiting direct or indirect discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation, political opinion or religious belief, winning at a Belfast county court and the Court of Appeal but losing at the Supreme Court. However, the ECtHR last week ruled his claim inadmissible on the grounds he had not exhausted his domestic remedies, in Gareth Lee v UK (application no 18860/19).

The judges stated, ‘Even if the applicant is correct in saying that the relevant provisions of the 2006 Regulations and the 1998 Order were enacted to protect the Convention rights of consumers, those provisions protect consumers only in a very limited way; that is, against discrimination in access to goods and services. They cannot, therefore, be said to protect consumers’ substantive rights under Arts 8, 9 or 10 of the Convention.’

They said ‘it is axiomatic that the applicant’s Convention rights should also have been invoked expressly before the domestic courts, even if the alleged breach was contingent on the outcome of their assessment’.

Expressing disappointment at a ‘missed opportunity’, Lee’s solicitor, Ciaran Moynagh, of Phoenix Law, said: ‘Mr Lee brought the appropriate and only application available to him and dealt with all arguments that arose in the course of appeals.

‘We are clear that Mr Lee’s Convention rights were engaged and put forward during the litigation. We will now consider whether a fresh domestic case is progressed.’

Issue: 7962 / Categories: Legal News , Discrimination , Human rights
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll