header-logo header-logo

Court of Appeal rules against civil partnership for same-sex couples

21 February 2017
Issue: 7735 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Straight couples cannot enter into civil partnerships…yet, the Court of Appeal has held.

Steinfeld and Keidan v Secretary of State for Education [2017] EWCA Civ 81 concerned an opposite-sex couple’s challenge to the Civil Partnership Act 2004, on the grounds same-sex couples can have a civil partnership but they cannot.

The couple contended that this bar breached their Art 14 right not to be discriminated against, and their Art 8 right to private and family life. They said they wanted the rights and benefits of marriage but had “deep-rooted and genuine ideological objections to marriage based upon what they consider to be its historically patriarchal nature”.

The 2004 Act ended generations of inequality by giving same-sex couples not only the right to have their relationship recognised in the eyes of the law but also to equal rights with those of married couples regarding tax, property, death and other matters. Marriage between same-sex couples became legal in 2013.

Since the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013, the number of new civil partnerships has gone down and the number of civil partnership dissolutions has gone up—many civil partners have converted their partnerships into marriages. Consequently, the government has said it wants to wait to see the impact of gay marriage before phasing out or abolishing civil partnership.

Lady Justice Arden and Lords Justice Beatson and Briggs said there was a potential violation of the couple’s Art 8 and 14 rights, but made a declaration that the government could reconsider her policy “either now or at a later time, as appropriate”.

Nigel Shepherd, chair of Resolution, said: “From a purely legal perspective, it makes little sense to retain civil partnership.

“But, if the option of civil partnerships for same sex couples is to continue to be retained, then civil partnerships must also be available to opposite sex couples in order to avoid discrimination.”

A Private Member's Bill proposing civil partnerships for heterosexual couples is due to have its second reading on 24 March 2017, and has cross-party support.

Lauren Evans, family law solicitor at Kingsley Napley, said: “It is imperative now that MPs take up the cause and don’t hide behind the government's current open-ended ‘wait and see’ policy.”

Issue: 7735 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Firm bolsters Manchester insurance practice with double partner appointment

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Private client division announces five new partners

NEWS
The landmark Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd—along with Rukhadze v Recovery Partners—redefine fiduciary duties in commercial fraud. Writing in NLJ this week, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley analyses the implications of the rulings
Barristers Ben Keith of 5 St Andrew’s Hill and Rhys Davies of Temple Garden Chambers use the arrest of Simon Leviev—the so-called Tinder Swindler—to explore the realities of Interpol red notices, in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] has upended assumptions about who may conduct litigation, warn Kevin Latham and Fraser Barnstaple of Kings Chambers in this week's NLJ. But is it as catastrophic as first feared?
Lord Sales has been appointed to become the Deputy President of the Supreme Court after Lord Hodge retires at the end of the year
Limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are reportedly in the firing line in Chancellor Rachel Reeves upcoming Autumn budget
back-to-top-scroll