June 8-9 2016
START DATE
END DATE
June 10 2016
Centre for Justice v. The Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs
COURT:
LAW:
JUDGE(S):
CLAIMANT'S LAWYER:
DEFENDANT'S LAWYER:
The Supreme Court of Bermuda
CIVIL JURISDICTION
IAN RC KAWALEY CJ
Alex Potts
Delroy Duncan for Preserve Marriage Limited Peter Sanderson for OUTBermuda
FACTS OF THE CASE:
The case examines the clash between newly protected rights against discrimination based on sexual orientation and older rights of freedom of conscience and expression in the context of a referendum on same-sex marriage and civil unions. It highlights Bermuda's historical struggle with human rights leading to the 1981 Human Rights Act amendment to include sexual orientation. The Government's failure to appeal the Bermuda Bred Company case led to a referendum contested for potentially undermining protected human rights.
SUMMARY:
Whether the Referendum (Same Sex Relationships) Act 2016 and the referendum itself are constitutional and lawful the appropriateness of using referendums for human rights issues the designation of churches as polling stations.
OUTCOMES:
The application for declarations that the Referendum Act 2016 is void for contravening the Constitution and other laws was refused. However the decision to use churches as polling stations was quashed. The application for an injunction to restrain the referendum was refused.
RULED IN FAVOUR OF:
Defendant
PLAINTIFF/CLAIMANT
DEFENDANT:
DURATION (DAYS):
ISSUES:
RELEVANCE:
RULING:
RULING TYPE:
CASES CITED:
Join our pro membership and get all the details at your finger tips
Want to see full case details, including key arguments and claims? [Join Pro Membership] to unlock exclusive insights.
Discover the legal strategies and defenses used in this case. [Join Pro Membership] for full access.
How long did this legal battle last, and what key events happened? [Join Pro Membership] to find out.
Uncover the critical legal principles debated in this case. [Join Pro Membership] for in-depth analysis.
See why this case matters in Banking, Mortgages, and Financial Services. [Join Pro Membership] to explore its impact.
Find out the final judgment and its legal implications. [Join Pro Membership] to access the ruling.
Understand how this judicial ruling sets a precedent in law. [Join Pro Membership] for expert breakdowns.
See how past legal precedents influenced this case. [Join Pro Membership] to unlock the list.
Download Case Summary:
Explore:
EPHESIANS 6:16
PT Satria Tirtatama Energindo v. East Asia Company Limited and Bali Energy Limited
2016
RE: C (VARIATION OF ACCESS ORDER)
2015
In the Matter of IPOC Capital Partners Limited and others
2007
Hindsight law can make mistakes. Consider checking original case studies
Centre for Justice v. The Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs
The case examines the clash between newly protected rights against discrimination based on sexual orientation and older rights of freedom of conscience and expression in the context of a referendum on same-sex marriage and civil unions. It highlights Bermuda's historical struggle with human rights leading to the 1981 Human Rights Act amendment to include sexual orientation. The Government's failure to appeal the Bermuda Bred Company case led to a referendum contested for potentially undermining protected human rights.