June 2019 – Direct Discrimination & Sexuality

The county court back in 2015 had held there was direct discrimination both on the grounds of sexuality and religious belief or political opinion. The district judge found the bakery had refused the order because of the genuinely held religious beliefs of Mr & Mrs McArthur – namely that the only form of marriage consistent with Biblical teaching was that between a man and a woman and not because of Mr Lees sexuality. However, the judge held that support for gay marriage was indissociable from sexual orientation.

The Supreme Court stated that this was a misunderstanding since support for gay marriage was not a proxy for any particular sexual orientation because people of all sexual orientations could and did support gay marriage.

The Supreme Court also found no direct discrimination on the grounds of religious belief since it would have to have been in respect of Mr Lee not the McArthurs.

As for political opinion, while it was possible that there might have been discrimination against Mr Lee, the regulations governing discrimination on grounds of religious or political belief should not have been read or given effect in such a way as to have compelled providers of goods, facilities or services to express a message with which they disagreed unless justification was shown for doing so.    

Contrast       Font size