A bid to lift the ban on heterosexual civil partnerships has been rejected by the High Court.
Opposite-sex couple Rebecca Steinfeld and Charles Keidan lost their judicial review action this week, in Steinfeld v Secretary of State for Education [2016] EWHC 128 (Admin). The couple say they had genuine ideological objections to the institution of marriage because of its historically patriarchal nature. They argue that the state, having created the institution of civil partnership, cannot lawfully exclude them because of their sexual orientation as to do so would be discriminatory.
Delivering her judgment, Mrs Justice Andrews said the government would be “taking a leap in the dark” which could turn out to be “an extremely expensive mistake” if it were to amend the law without gathering sufficient information about the impact of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013. The latest figures show the number of civil partnerships in sharp decline as same-sex couples opt for marriage.
However, family lawyer Lauren Evans, of Kingsley Napley, says: “The law at the moment clearly discriminates on the grounds of sexuality.
“Everyone, be they straight, gay or bisexual, should have the same freedom to choose how to define their relationship. Parliament needs to step in to correct this hangover from a government that was unwilling to go all the way first time around with the Civil Partnership Act.”
A Private Member’s Bill to open civil partnerships up to opposite-sex couples had its second reading in the House of Commons this week. The Bill, proposed by Tim Loughton MP, has cross-party support from MPs.
