Refusing Double Room to Same Sex Couple was Discriminatory

In Bull and another v Hall and another [2013] UKSC 73, the Supreme Court held that a same sex couple had been directly discriminated against because of their sexual orientation when they were refused a double room in a hotel.

For religious reasons, Mr and Mrs Bull (the hotel owners) only permitted married couples to share a double room in their hotel and did not recognise civil partnership as equivalent to marriage. On this basis, they did not allow Mr Preddy and Mr Hall (the "Claimants"), a same sex couple in a civil partnership, to share a double room.  The Supreme Court held that this was directly discriminatory on the ground of sexual orientation. The Court found that as a matter of law there was no material difference between a heterosexual married couple and a same sex couple in a civil partnership. As the hotel owners would have allowed a heterosexual married couple to share a double room, the only reason they treated the Claimants less favourably was because of their sexual orientation and this amounted to direct discrimination. The Court also held that the UK's discrimination legislation was compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights, and so there was no breach of the hotel owners' rights to express their religion and belief.

Although this case concerned the provision of services, it is likely to be relevant in the employment context. Employers should tread very carefully when dealing with employees seeking to assert conflicting legal rights.