header-logo header-logo

20 October 2011 / Hle Blog
Issue: 7486 / Categories: Blogs
printer mail-detail

The ties that bind

HLE blogger James Wilson follows the turning tide relating to gay marriage

 Prime Minister David Cameron made headlines with his recent speech to the Conservative Party Conference. Having stated that he was “consulting on gay marriage”, he went on to say: “Conservatives believe in the ties that bind us; that society is stronger when we make vows to each other and support each other. So I don’t support gay marriage despite being a Conservative. I support gay marriage because I’m a Conservative.”

It seems to me that we have reached this point due to three primary issues. First, the legal rights that marriage has long conferred were seen to discriminate against those who could not legally marry. The concept of civil partnerships was therefore created in order to provide same-sex couples with the same legal rights.

The second issue concerns the right of registrars to refuse to conduct civil partnerships on religious grounds. They were not permitted to refuse.

The third issue was whether religious premises should be permitted to host civil ceremonies. The law giving effect to this (s 202 of the Equality Act 2010) has not yet come into force.

We are therefore about to reach the stage where civil partnerships have the same legal status of marriage; that no registrar can refuse to conduct them on religious grounds; and that religious groups may choose to host civil partnership ceremonies (but may not be forced to do so).

Two side issues arise. First. why civil partnerships have to be restricted to same-sex relationships akin to marriage: some siblings may choose to live together in a chaste relationship, but they will not be permitted to enter into a civil partnership or marriage. The second concerns whether religious groups will always be able to refuse to conduct civil ceremonies on their premises...”

Continue reading at  www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
 

Issue: 7486 / Categories: Blogs
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll