Gay couple Michael Black and John Morgan sue bed and breakfast owner Susanne Wilkinson over room refusal
Monday 17 September 2012
A gay couple today sued the owner of bed and breakfast accommodation after she refused to let them stay in a double room because of her religious views.
Michael Black, 64, and partner John Morgan, 59, sought damages from Susanne Wilkinson after she declined to let them have the room at the Swiss Bed and Breakfast in Cookham, Berkshire, in March 2010.
In their particulars of claim to Reading County Court, the couple, from Brampton, near Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire, told how Mr Black, an exams consultant and writer, had booked a double room for March 19 2010.
But when he and his computer consultant partner arrived there Mrs Wilkinson made clear to them that she was not prepared to allow them to share a double bed and that she would not accommodate them.
Lawyers from Liberty, the human rights organisation, which has taken up the case, argued that under legal regulations it was unlawful for a person concerned with the provision of services to the public to discriminate against a person on the grounds of that person's sexual orientation.
Lawyers for Mrs Wilkinson argued that a person offering bed and breakfast in their own home was entitled to refuse to permit persons who were not married or in a civil partnership (whether of the opposite sex or the same sex) to share a double bed.
The couple are not in a civil partnership.
In these circumstances, there was no direct or indirect discrimination, they said.
Mrs Wilkinson, a married mother-of-four, considers that providing a double bed to the couple would involve her in promoting what she believed to be a sin, namely sexual relations outside heterosexual marriage.
James Dingemans QC, for Mrs Wilkinson, told the court: "If Mrs Wilkinson had simply said, 'don't come in because you're gay', that could never be justified. It was simply the provision of the double bed which Mrs Wilkinson believed was wrong."
Henrietta Hill, for the couple, said: "It is obvious that there is a difficult balancing act to be carried out in this case. The proper balance to be struck has already been determined by the very clear will of Parliament."
The men seek a declaration that they have been discriminated against, and damages - if they win the case, it has been agreed that £1,800 each would be an appropriate sum, Ms Hill said.
It has been previously reported that they will give any money to charity.
The judge, Recorder Claire Moulder, reserved judgment after the one-day hearing, saying she expected to give her ruling in one to two weeks' time.
- 2 Raif Badawi, the Saudi Arabian blogger sentenced to 1,000 lashes, may now face the death penalty
- 3 PornHub turns masturbation into energy in bid to save the planet
- 4 Robert Mugabe eats a zoo for 'obscene' 91st birthday party
New theory could prove how life began and disprove God
This is what it's like to be dead, according to a guy who died for a bit
'Jihadi John': CAGE representative storms off Sky News accusing Kay Burley of Islamophobia
Ukip would cut billions from Scottish budget to fund English tax cuts
Russia's roadmap for annexing eastern Ukraine 'leaked from Vladimir Putin's office'
Ukraine crisis: Top Chinese diplomat backs Putin and says West should 'abandon zero-sum mentality'
£9 per hour: Recruitment Genius: This role is based within a small family run ...
£28000 - £32000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: This Design and marketing agenc...
£46000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: This property investment firm are lookin...
£18000 - £35000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: This company specialises provid...