We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. By continuing to browse this repository, you give consent for essential cookies to be used. You can read more about our Privacy and Cookie Policy.

Durham Research Online
You are in:

Justifiable discrimination - the case of opposite-sex civil partnerships.

Hayward, A. (2017) 'Justifiable discrimination - the case of opposite-sex civil partnerships.', Cambridge law journal., 76 (2). pp. 243-246.


OPPOSITE-SEX couples are prohibited from forming a civil partnership. Following the introduction of same-sex marriage, the Civil Partnership Act 2004 was not extended to opposite-sex couples, resulting in the unusual position that English law permits same-sex couples access to two relationship forms (marriage and civil partnership) yet limits opposite-sex couples to one (marriage). This discrimination was recently challenged in the courts by an opposite-sex couple, Rebecca Steinfeld and Charles Keidan, who wish to enter a civil partnership owing to their deeply-rooted ideological opposition to marriage. Rejecting marriage as a patriarchal institution and believing that a civil partnership would offer a more egalitarian public expression of their relationship, the couple argued that the current ban constitutes a breach of Article 14 read in conjunction with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Item Type:Article
Full text:(AM) Accepted Manuscript
Download PDF
Status:Not peer-reviewed
Publisher Web site:
Publisher statement:This article has been accepted for publication and will appear in a revised form in The Cambridge Law Journal This version is free to view and download for private research and study only. Not for re-distribution, re-sale or use in derivative works. © Cambridge Law Journal and Contributors 2017.
Date accepted:10 May 2017
Date deposited:30 May 2017
Date of first online publication:12 July 2017
Date first made open access:30 May 2017

Save or Share this output

Look up in GoogleScholar