THE MAILONLINE Your rights are trumped by gay equality, B&B owners who refused to let couple share a room are told By John Stevens Last updated at 9:34 PM on 10th February 2012
Two Christian hotel owners who refused to let a gay couple share a room have been told that the rights of homosexuals come before those of Christians in the eyes of the law. Peter and Hazelmary Bull yesterday lost their appeal against an order to pay thousands of pounds in compensation to two gay men who booked an £80-a-night double room at their Cornish B&B. The Court of Appeal told Mr and Mrs Bull that they were entitled to express their beliefs, but not if they were incompatible with the rights of gay people. The landmark ruling by the three Appeal Court judges confirmed the supremacy of gay rights over Christian belief under the Sexual Orientation Regulations brought in by the Labour party. Mr and Mrs Bull, 71 and 66, run Chymorvah House in Marazion. In September 2008 they accepted a booking for an £80-a-night double room from Steven Preddy, 38, believing he would be staying with his wife. But when Mr Preddy arrived with his 46-year-old civil partner Martyn Hall, the men were told that they could have two rooms, but not share one. In January last year Judge Andrew Rutherford ruled at Bristol County Court that the Bulls had breached equality legislation and ordered them to pay the couple a total of £3,600 damages. In their appeal, lawyers for the Bulls told the appeal court judges that the couple thought any sex outside marriage was a ‘sin’. They denied that they had discriminated against Mr Hall and Mr Preddy, from Bristol, because they had also barred unmarried heterosexual couples from sharing double rooms since they opened for business 25 years ago. But yesterday Sir Andrew Morritt, Chancellor of the High Court, Lord Justice Hooper and Lady Justice Rafferty, sitting at the Court of Appeal in London, unanimously dismissed their plea. Lady Justice Rafferty said: ‘Whilst the appellants’ beliefs about sexual practice may not find the acceptance that once they did, nevertheless a democratic society must ensure that their espousal and expression remain open to those who hold them. ‘However, in a pluralist society it is inevitable that from time to time, as here, views, beliefs and rights of some are not compatible with those of others. ‘As I have made plain, I do not consider that the appellants face any difficulty in manifesting their religious beliefs, they are merely prohibited from so doing in the commercial context they have chosen.’ The taxpayer-funded state equality body, the Equality and Human Rights Commission, had backed Mr Preddy and Mr Hall in their action. Outside court, John Wadham of the EHRC said: ‘We believe that this case will help people to better understand the law around freedom of religion. ‘When offering a service, people cannot use their beliefs, religious or otherwise, to discriminate against others.’ But Simon Calvert, of the Christian Institute, which funded Mr and Mrs Bull’s appeal, said: ‘Something has gone badly wrong with our equality laws when good, decent people like Peter and Hazelmary are penalised but extremist hate preachers are protected.’ Neither couple was in court for the hearing. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2099570/Your-rights-trumped-gay-equality-B-amp-B-owners-refused-let-couple-share-room-told.html#ixzz1m3TkUQGA
