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

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
back-to-top-scroll