header-logo header-logo

06 December 2018 / Dr Michael Arnheim
Issue: 7820 / Categories: Features , Discrimination
printer mail-detail

The gay wedding cake saga

Michael Arnheim looks at false analogies & illogicalities in the ‘gay wedding cake’ decisions

  • Reviews the high-profile ‘gay marriage cake’ case.
  • Highlights false analogies and illogicality in the chain of decisions.
  • Concludes the Supreme Court made the right decision.

Are bakers legally obliged to make a cake bearing a slogan to which they have a fundamental religious objection? Whatever the bakers’ religion may be, it surely cannot be right to force them to promote a belief with which they fundamentally disagree. Nor should it matter what the objectionable slogan is. Otherwise the right to freedom of religion and the right to freedom of expression enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) have no meaning. Yet, this is precisely the situation in which a Christian couple who owned a bakery in Belfast found themselves—until the matter came before the UK Supreme Court (UKSC).

Material facts

Colin and Karen McArthur (pictured), the proprietors of Ashers Baking Company in Belfast, were approached by Gareth Lee, a gay man, and asked

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll