The owners of a private hotel in Bristol have been ordered to pay compensation to a gay couple who were refused a double room because of their sexual orientation. This precedent setting case is likely to have important legal implications for hotel owners throughout the UK.
Martyn Hall and Steven Preddy have won their claim in the Bristol County Court on the grounds that the hotel owners' refusal breached their rights not to be subjected to discrimination because of their sexual orientation under the Employment Equality (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2003, (now the Equality Act 2010). The hotel owners, who are devout Christians and aged 70 and 66, had insisted their long-standing policy banned all unmarried couples, whether heterosexual or gay, from sharing a bed. This policy, they said, was based on their beliefs about sex before marriage and not a hostility to sexual orientation. However, the court held that their views were archaic and that social attitudes in Britain had changed over the last 50 years. The court held that as there is no material difference between a marriage and civil partnership, the only conclusion which can be drawn is that the refusal to allow Mr Hall and Mr Preddy to occupy the double room which they had booked was direct discrimination because of their sexual orientation.
Julian Yew, employment partner in the hotels and leisure group at London and South East law firm Penningtons Solicitors LLP, commented: "There was a similar case concerning a B&B in Cookham in March 2010 but this is the first case in the UK in which a county court has ruled that turning a gay couple away due to Christian beliefs breaches the law. Section 29 of the Equality Act 2010, which became law in October 2010, states that it is unlawful for providers of services to discriminate against their customers or guests on grounds of sex, race, disability, sexual orientation, religion or belief and age. The judge pointed out that if the hotel's policy was right, two friends of the same sex who were backpacking around Cornwall could not have a double room at their hotel. Conversely, a straight or gay couple in a sexual relationship could enjoy a sexually fulfilling weekend provided that they had booked a twin bedded room. The hotel's policy was therefore discriminatory on grounds of marital status and in turn, sexual orientation."
Yew added: "Hoteliers need to ensure that they do not discriminate against their guests or instruct their staff to do so. They have to provide a service regardless of their personal prejudice against someone's religious belief, age or disability. This is often not easy for B&B operators whose business property also happens to be their home and they feel that they should have the ultimate right to decide who they allow through their doors. Employees who knowingly carry out an unlawful instruction could also be personally liable under the Equality Act. The hotel owners in this case have been given the right to appeal to the High Court so this may not be the last word. Watch this space."
Contact: Julian Yew
Related services: Employment, hotels and leisure