Gibraltar’s Government housing allocation policy is to be changed to include ‘same-sex’ partners following a ruling by the Privy Council last year that the rights of a local lesbian couple had been breached by “unlawful discrimination.”
Supported by local gay rights activists the couple had claimed that they had been unfairly treated in regard to allocation of government housing, arguing that their claim to accommodation should be should be handled in the same way as claims are for married and unmarried heterosexual couples.
The Government fought the case in the local courts and before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in London in a statement this week, the Government said it had no option but to reformulate its existing policy to comply with the judgment.
“Our policy is based (as it has always been) around the traditional nuclear family, and the protection of the interests of children of unmarried heterosexual couples,” said the Government spokesman.
“On the 14th December 2009, the Privy Council (reversing the decisions of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal of Gibraltar) ruled that the long established policy of the Housing Department to allow ‘joint tenancies’ of Government flats only in favour of a spouse, parent, adult child or common law partner (with children in common) of the tenant, was unconstitutional,” the statement issued from the Chief Minister’s office said.
“The reason being, according to the Privy Council that this discriminated unlawfully against homosexual couples because they could neither marry nor have children, and thus could never qualify.
“The Court ruled that the Housing Department must have a policy ‘which does not exclude same sex partners who are in a stable, long term, committed and interdependent relationship from the protection afforded by a joint tenancy.’
“Despite its policy, the Government has no option but to reformulate the policy in terms that complies with the Privy Council’s ruling, i.e. does not discriminate against same sex couples of the sort described by the Court in its ruling.”