Utterly pointless waste of money court case

[Alf W]

This had better not have involved any public money whatsoever.

Gay Couple Win B&B Discrimination Case Against Christian Owners, Damages Of £1,800 Each | UK News | Sky News

In cases like these why doesn't the judge just tell everyone to f*** off home and stop wasting public resources?

[Mich the Tester]

This had better not have involved any public money whatsoever.

Gay Couple Win B&B Discrimination Case Against Christian Owners, Damages Of £1,800 Each | UK News | Sky News

In cases like these why doesn't the judge just tell everyone to f*** off home and stop wasting public resources?

Yep. Why open a B&B if you don't like guests? Why stay in a B&B if you don't like the hosts?

Waste of money on all sides; make them all pay the court costs.

[xoggoth]

I bet it cost us lots. In favour of gay rights generally but as have said before there should be lower boundaries, in private houses or very small owner run businesses, where such public policy laws should not apply. Everyone should be entitled to control their personal space whatever their reasons.

[Mich the Tester]

I bet it cost us lots. In favour of gay rights generally but as have said before there should be lower boundaries, in private houses or very small owner run businesses, where such public policy laws should not apply. Everyone should be entitled to control their personal space whatever their reasons.

Agreed, but if you don't like other people's bedtime activities, you're sort of asking for trouble if you open a B&B.

[sasguru]

Check out the B&B owners picture on the link above.
Both look like they've swallowed several wasps at once
A living advert for the life enhancing benefits of atheism and rationality.

[RichardCranium]

Since there was a notice on the B&B web site saying "We have few rules but please note that out of a deep regard for marriage we prefer to let double accommodation to heterosexual married couples only" then paying compensation to the chap in question seems like abuse of the legal system. A fine I could understand.

In theory, an engaged couple could have sued them too.

Edit: they didn't refuse to put them up; merely said they'd need to stay in separate rooms. Quite a few times I've booked a double room online for me & Mrs RC then got a twin room. Fukc it, in future I'll sue the hotel chain.

[SueEllen]

Since there was a notice on the B&B web site saying "We have few rules but please note that out of a deep regard for marriage we prefer to let double accommodation to heterosexual married couples only" then paying compensation to the chap in question seems like abuse of the legal system. A fine I could understand.

Their sign is illegal, which is the entire point of the case.

There are plenty of discrimination cases where public money is wasted simply because once the people doing the discrimination are warned they are breaking the law they refuse to take notice until they go to court and lose.

One case I can remember is a wheel chair user took one of the cheap airline to court in the past over paying for the use of a wheelchair at the airport.Ryanair and wheelchair user

[RichardCranium]

Their sign is illegal, which is the entire point of the case.

So it was just a vexatious litigation?

[Churchill]

Do they ask to see a Marriage Licence?

Anyway, if I owned a Hotel I'd ensure that the following notice was visible...

"Management reserves the right to refuse admission."

A bit better than "No Blacks No Dogs No Irish", but could mean pretty much mean anything.

[SueEllen]

So it was just a vexatious litigation?

Nope. Vexatious litigation is something different.

The entire point was the idiots who ran the B&B didn't recognised that a civil partnership in law is equal to marriage. So while they could have got away discriminating against couples who are engaged of any sexual persuasion, they can't get away discriminating against those in civil partnerships.