The English Court of Appeal in Bull & Bull v Hall & Preddy have upheld a High Court ruling that a Christian couple discriminated against a same-sex couple on grounds of sexual orientation when the former refused the latter a double bedded room in their hotel.
Mr. and Mrs. Bull restricted the use of double-bedded rooms within their hotel to married couples. Their central argument was that they had not directly discriminated against the couple as the restriction was based on ‘sexual practices’ rather than ‘sexual orientation’. In other words, the appellants prohibited unmarried heterosexual couples as well as same-sex couples from booking double bedded rooms.
The court found that there was direct discrimination under relevant equality legislation as in the case of same-sex couples the hotel’s restriction was absolute (as they cannot marry), but in the case of heterosexuals the restriction was not absolute. The court held that there was no breach of the appellants Article 8 ECHR rights (the right to respect for private and family life), and in fact said that to uphold the prohibition would rather breach the respondents’ Article 8 rights.
However, central arguments in the case turned on Article 9 of the ECHR. The court found that there was a breach of the appellants’ rights to manifest their religion and the court therefore had to decide whether such a breach was justified. In finding that the breach was justified, the court said that Article 9 rights are primarily protected within the private sphere and the hotel business would fall within the public sphere. However, the court said that the appellants were still able to manifest their religion in the private sphere in many ways.