R (Steinfeld and Keidan) v Secretary of State for International Development [2018] UKSC 32

Court: UK Supreme Court

Facts: The claimants, Steinfeld and Keidan, challenged the UK government's ban on different-sex civil partnerships, arguing that it was discriminatory. They contended that the prohibition infringed upon their rights under Articles 8 (right to respect for private and family life) and 14 (prohibition of discrimination) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The claimants sought recognition of their relationship through a civil partnership rather than marriage. Issue: Is the ban on different-sex civil partnerships incompatible with Articles 8 and 14 of the ECHR?

Held: The Supreme Court declared that the ban on different-sex civil partnerships was indeed incompatible with Articles 8 and 14 of the ECHR. The Court concluded that the government’s failure to provide different-sex couples with the option of a civil partnership constituted a violation of their rights.

Key Judicial Statements: The court ruled that the legislation creating the ban was incompatible with the ECHR, emphasizing the importance of equality in recognizing relationships.

💡 LevelUpLaw: This case exemplifies the evolving understanding of equality rights within the framework of human rights law. It underscores the necessity for legislative reforms to ensure that all couples, regardless of their sex, have equal access to civil partnerships, thus reflecting societal changes in the recognition of diverse relationships.