The Court of Appeal in London rejected a claim by Rebecca Steinfeld and Charles Keidan, from London, who argued that they were discriminated against because civil partnerships are only available to people of the same sex.
Steinfeld and Keidan oppose traditional marriage because they regard it as a “patriarchal” institution. Speaking outside court, Steinfeld said they were “deeply disappointed” by the ruling.
When it was introduced in 2004, the Civil Partnership Act allowed same-sex couples in Britain to enter a legal partnership for the first time. It conferred almost the same legal rights as traditional marriage, except for the right to marry in a religious setting. Same-sex civil partners did not have the right to declare themselves “married” for legal purposes.
Britain legalized same-sex marriage in 2013, but retained civil partnership legislation.
Steinfeld and Keidan had argued in lower court hearings that the provisions around civil partnership were “incompatible with equality law.”
The government argued that it would make a final decision on whether to abolish civil partnerships or extend them to everyone after evaluating the impact of the later same-sex marriage law.
Two of the three judges hearing the case at the Court of Appeal said the government should have more time to evaluate the best way forward on civil partnerships and marriages. The third judge dissented, according to a summary of the judgment released by the Court of Appeal.