Fitzpatrick v Sterling Housing Association Ltd

Last updated

Fitzpatrick v Sterling Housing Association Ltd
CourtHouse of Lords
Full case nameFITZPATRICK (A.P.)(APPELLANT) v. STERLING HOUSING ASSOCIATION LTD. (RESPONDENTS)
Decided29 October 1999
Citation(s)Fitzpatrick v. Sterling Housing Association Ltd [1999] UKHL 42; [1999] 4 All ER 705; [1999] 3 WLR 1113 (28th October, 1999)
Transcript(s) judgment
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Clyde, Lord Hutton, Lord Hobhouse of Wood-borough

Fitzpatrick v Sterling Housing Association Ltd was a 1999 legal case heard by the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords regarding the meaning of the word 'family' with regards to the Rent Act 1977. The Lords found that a gay couple living together could be seen as a family for the purposes of housing law, and that a family relationship did not require either a blood relationship (as between parent and child) or marriage (at the time, neither marriage nor civil partnerships were available for same-sex couples). [1] [2] [3]

Under the Rent Act (and later amendments under the Housing Act 1998), protected tenants could pass on their tenancy to spouses or cohabiting family members upon their death. The claimant in this case, Martin Fitzpatrick, had lived with his partner John Thompson from 1976 until his death in 1994, having met in 1969. Thompson had rented the flat from 1972 onwards. The law allows for succession in a tenancy agreement for spouses, those "living with him or her as a husband or wife", and members of one's family who have resided in the flat for at least two years before the tenant's death. The Court of Appeal rejected Mr Fitzpatrick's initial appeal, citing the precedent of Harrogate Borough Council v Simpson where the Court of Appeal determined that "living together as husband and wife" did not extend to a homosexual couple. The Court of Appeal decision expressed considerable sympathy for the appellant, citing his selfless dedication to caring for his partner for many years, but stated that it was the job of Parliament to change the law to extend protected tenancy succession rights to same-sex couples. [4]

The House of Lords allowed that the appellant and his partner did constitute a family for legal purposes. The Lords decision agreed that there was not a spousal relationship (which they interpreted to mean a heterosexual marriage), nor were they "living together as a husband or wife" (which they interpreted as providing protection only for unmarried heterosexual couples), but stated that a long-term same-sex relationship could be considered a family even without the ties of blood or marriage. [5] The decision was welcomed by gay rights campaigners including the campaign group Stonewall.

See also

Related Research Articles

Common-law marriage, also known as non-ceremonial marriage, sui iuris marriage, informal marriage, de facto marriage, or marriage by habit and repute, is a legal framework where a couple may be considered married without having formally registered their relation as a civil or religious marriage.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2000 United States census</span> 22nd United States national census

The United States census of 2000, conducted by the Census Bureau, determined the resident population of the United States on April 1, 2000, to be 281,421,906, an increase of 13.2 percent over the 248,709,873 people enumerated during the 1990 census. This was the twenty-second federal census and was at the time the largest civilly administered peacetime effort in the United States.

<i>Egan v Canada</i> Supreme Court of Canada case

Egan v Canada, [1995] 2 SCR 513 was one of a trilogy of equality rights cases published by a very divided Supreme Court of Canada in the spring of 1995. It stands today as a landmark Supreme Court case which established that sexual orientation constitutes a prohibited basis of discrimination under section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Same-sex marriage in Ontario</span>

Same-sex marriage in Ontario has been legal since June 10, 2003. The first legal same-sex marriages performed in Ontario were of Kevin Bourassa to Joe Varnell, and Elaine Vautour to Anne Vautour, by Reverend Brent Hawkes on January 14, 2001. The legality of the marriages was questioned and they were not registered until after June 10, 2003, when the Court of Appeal for Ontario in Halpern v Canada (AG) upheld a lower court ruling which declared that defining marriage in heterosexual-only terms violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Recognition of same-sex unions in Poland</span>

Poland does not legally recognize same-sex unions, either in the form of marriage or civil unions. In 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples have limited legal rights in regards to the tenancy of a shared household. A few laws also guarantee certain limited rights for unmarried couples, including couples of the same sex. Same-sex spouses also have access to residency rights under EU law.

China recognizes neither same-sex marriage nor civil unions. Since 1 October 2017, couples have been able to sign guardianship agreements offering partners some limited legal benefits, including decisions about medical and personal care, death and funeral, property management, and maintenance of rights and interests.

The legal status of same-sex marriage has changed in recent years in numerous jurisdictions around the world. The current trends and consensus of political authorities and religions throughout the world are summarized in this article.

A mixed-orientation marriage is a marriage between partners of differing sexual orientations. The broader term is mixed-orientation relationship, sometimes shortened to MOR or MORE.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Same-sex relationship</span> Romantic or sexual relationship between people of the same sex

A same-sex relationship is a romantic or sexual relationship between people of the same sex. Same-sex marriage refers to the institutionalized recognition of such relationships in the form of a marriage; civil unions may exist in countries where same-sex marriage does not.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in Hong Kong</span>

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) persons in Hong Kong, may face legal challenges not experienced by non-LGBT residents.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in the Cayman Islands</span>

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) persons in the Cayman Islands may face legal challenges not experienced by non-LGBT residents. Both male and female same-sex sexual activity are legal in the Cayman Islands. Despite anti-gay attitudes expressed by certain members of the government, social acceptance by the Caymanian public has been known to be some of the best in the Caribbean.

South Korea does not recognize same-sex marriage, civil unions or any other form of legal union for same-sex couples.

The United States military formerly excluded gay men, bisexuals, and lesbians from service. In 1993, the United States Congress passed, and President Bill Clinton signed a law instituting the policy commonly referred to as "Don't ask, don't tell" (DADT) which allowed gay, lesbian, and bisexual people to serve as long as they did not reveal their sexual orientation. Although there were isolated instances in which service personnel were met with limited success through lawsuits, efforts to end the ban on openly gay, lesbian, and bisexual people serving either legislatively, or through the courts initially proved unsuccessful.

<i>National Coalition for Gay and Lesbian Equality v Minister of Home Affairs</i> South African legal case

National Coalition for Gay and Lesbian Equality and Others v Minister of Home Affairs and Others, [1999] ZACC 17, is a 1999 decision of the Constitutional Court of South Africa which extended to same-sex partners the same benefits granted to spouses in the issuing of immigration permits. It was the first Constitutional Court case to deal with the recognition of same-sex partnerships, and also the first case in which a South African court adopted the remedy of "reading in" to correct an unconstitutional law. The case is of particular importance in the areas of civil procedure, immigration, and constitutional law and litigation.

<i>Adams v. Howerton</i>

Adams v. Howerton, 673 F.2d 1036, cert. denied, 458 U.S. 1111 (1982) is a decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that held that the term "spouse" refers to an opposite-sex partner for the purposes of immigration law and that this definition met the standard at the time for rational basis review. It was the first U.S. lawsuit to seek recognition of a same-sex marriage by the federal government.

The topic of same-sex unions and military service concerns the government treatment or recognition of same-sex unions who may consist of at least one servicemember of a nation's military.

Until 2017, laws related to LGBTQ+ couples adopting children varied by state. Some states granted full adoption rights to same-sex couples, while others banned same-sex adoption or only allowed one partner in a same-sex relationship to adopt the biological child of the other. Despite these rulings, same-sex couples and members of the LGBTQ+ community still face discrimination when attempting to foster children.

The United States policy regarding same-sex immigration denied couples in same-sex relationships the same rights and privileges afforded different-sex couples based on several court decisions and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) until the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Section 3 of DOMA unconstitutional in United States v. Windsor on June 26, 2013.

<i>Braschi v. Stahl Associates Co.</i>

Braschi v. Stahl Associates Co. was a 1989 New York Court of Appeals case that decided that the surviving partner of a same-sex relationship counted as "family" under New York law and was thus able to continue living in a rent controlled apartment belonging to the deceased partner.

Hong Kong does not recognise same-sex marriages or civil unions. However, same-sex couples are afforded limited legal rights as a result of several court decisions, including the right to apply for a spousal visa, guardianship rights and joint custody of children, and spousal benefits for the partners of government employees.

References

  1. ↑ "Landmark ruling for gay tenants". BBC News. 28 October 1999.
  2. ↑ "Gay partner 'entitled to keep flat of dead spouse'". The Guardian. 14 April 1999.
  3. ↑ Patricia Wynn Davies (9 June 1997). "Gay carer fights for right to home after partner dies". The Independent.
  4. ↑ Kate O'Hanlon (29 July 1997). "LAW REPORT: Homosexual partner has no right in protected tenancy". The Independent.
  5. ↑ Kate O'Hanlon (2 November 1999). "Law Report: Homosexual couple can be members of a family". The Independent.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.