The Court of Appeal has held that preventing mixed sex couples from entering into civil partnerships is not a breach of human rights. The Court found that the appellants had demonstrated an interference with their rights under Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) taken together with Article 8 (right to private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), because there was a difference in treatment on the grounds of sexual orientation. However, it went on to find that given there was no “adverse impact” on the appellants beyond their inability to enter into a civil partnership the State was not in breach of its obligations under the ECHR.
The Court was divided on its reasoning with regards the justification for the difference in treatment – with some judges influenced by the State’s arguments that in light of the introduction of same-sex marriage there may no longer be a need for civil partnerships and to amend the law in the manner sought by the appellants could potentially be unnecessary, time consuming and expensive. Others judges of the Court while recognising the need for reflection had concerns regarding the open-ended nature of such deliberations and queried whether it was proportionate to the interference with the rights under the ECHR were it to continue unchecked. The court ultimately considered that this is a matter of public policy to be resolved by the government and by Parliament rather than the courts.
The fact that there is now a Private Members’ Bill pending before Parliament on this issue may have influenced the judges reasoning.
For a copy of the Judgment click here.
For further commentary click here.