This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/england/london/8413196.stm
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Version 0 | Version 1 |
---|---|
Registrar loses partnership case | |
(about 3 hours later) | |
A Christian registrar disciplined for refusing to conduct same-sex civil partnerships has lost her appeal against the ruling. | |
Lillian Ladele said she could not carry out same-sex ceremonies "as a matter of religious conscience". | Lillian Ladele said she could not carry out same-sex ceremonies "as a matter of religious conscience". |
In July 2008, an employment tribunal found north London's Islington Council had discriminated against her. This was overturned by an appeal tribunal. | |
The Court of Appeal in London upheld the appeal tribunal's ruling. | |
Bullying claims | |
At a recent hearing in London, James Dingemans QC, representing her, told a panel of three appeal judges that Ms Ladele had never wanted to undermine the human rights of members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender communities. | At a recent hearing in London, James Dingemans QC, representing her, told a panel of three appeal judges that Ms Ladele had never wanted to undermine the human rights of members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender communities. |
But human rights laws must also be there to protect people with committed views about marriage, he said. | But human rights laws must also be there to protect people with committed views about marriage, he said. |
Ms Ladele, who became a registrar in 2002, claims she suffered ridicule and bullying as a result of her stance and said she had been harassed and discriminated against by the council. | Ms Ladele, who became a registrar in 2002, claims she suffered ridicule and bullying as a result of her stance and said she had been harassed and discriminated against by the council. |
The employment appeal tribunal ruled last December the earlier tribunal had "erred in law" and there was no basis for concluding that any "discrimination had been established". | The employment appeal tribunal ruled last December the earlier tribunal had "erred in law" and there was no basis for concluding that any "discrimination had been established". |