Gay Cake Gate Thrown Out.......

[ToraToraTora]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-59882444

[New Judge]

//I applaud the actions of the couple involved, not to allow others to have their lifestyle demographics demeaned by strangers, who broke the law to make their odious point.//

Are you applauding the gay couple, or the bakers, Andy? Since neither broke the law, it seems your applause could be reserved for either of them.

[dannyk13]

and what patrt of that act would apply to this incident because I can't see it.

[naomi24]

AH, shops may be requested to provide a service but they are under no obligation.

[andy-hughes]

danny - // and what patrt of that act would apply to this incident because I can't see it. //

I have no idea, I am not a lawyer, but as I understand it, the bakery owners were successfully prosecuted under the law - hopefully NewJudge can offer a more informed opinion.

[andy-hughes]

naomi - // AH, shops may be requested to provide a service but they are under no obligation. //

I have pointed out that simple fact at least twice in my previous posts, do try to keep up.

[andy-hughes]

New Judge - // ... Since neither broke the law ... //

Then what was the basis for the couple successfully taking the bakers to court?

[douglas9401]

I can't see it either. Maybe it's the wrong law. Maybe just wishful thinking.

[Redhelen72]

As I have said on here many times, I know Gareth and I was there when he took the call from the bakers.

They had the order for over a week before they told him they would not complete the order and why, he went to that bakers because it was local to our office and had a good reputation.

[dannyk13]

Andy, the case was thrown out as it says in the OP.

[bednobs]

as i understand it from TTTs link the current position is they did NOT successfully take the bakers to court. The supreme court reversed the decision, effectively wiping the "win" out

[andy-hughes]

bednobs - // as i understand it from TTTs link the current position is they did NOT successfully take the bakers to court. The supreme court reversed the decision, effectively wiping the "win" out //

As I understand it, the Supreme Court reversed the original ruling - therefore there must have been an original successful court ruling for the SC to overturn - ?

[dannyk13]

Andy. what it boils down to is that the shopkeeper had not committed any offence.

[bednobs]

yes, but the supreme court trumps and nullifies the two earlier rulings meaning that today, they did not succesfully sue them. If they were currently successful, they wouldnt have to go to the european courts

[andy-hughes]

Redhelen - // As I have said on here many times, I know Gareth and I was there when he took the call from the bakers.

They had the order for over a week before they told him they would not complete the order and why, he went to that bakers because it was local to our office and had a good reputation. //

I do recall your valuable take on this story when it was aired at the time.

There have been posts on here that infer that the action was taken simply because the gentleman involved is an 'activist' - but from my perspective, that is a coincidence.

Anyone is entitled to legal redress if they are wronged in this way, and his activism neither assists or prevents that right.

[naomi24]

//I have pointed out that simple fact at least twice in my previous posts, do try to keep up. //

And possibly more. I think I keep up relatively well. You seem to be going into reverse at the moment - but I could be wrong.

[pat2604]

I haven't seen your previous posts Red. Probably during my years away from AB during that time. I must admit that it doesn't say much for the bakery and strengthens the case for seeking legal help.

[andy-hughes]

bednobs - // yes, but the supreme court trumps and nullifies the two earlier rulings meaning that today, they did not succesfully sue them. If they were currently successful, they wouldnt have to go to the european courts //

I understand that - as it stands, the case was not successful.

But that is the result of a higher court ruling - there was a period of time when the case was successful, and it is that period of time to which I am referring.

Overturning a ruling does not mean that the case and the ruling did not actually take place, merely that it has now been superseded.

[Redhelen72]

It has been suggested on here that he sought out this bakers because they were religious!
Well blast me everyone is religious in NI!!
Its was pure ease of location to the office - he is not there person that some on here is making him out to be!

[SparklyKid]

Personally I do not support gay marriage.

If that makes me a prejudiced bigot I have no problem with that.

Over to you AH, lol.

[andy-hughes]

naomi - // You seem to be going into reverse at the moment - but I could be wrong. //

You are, but don't let that stop you.

Similarly you are wrong in suggesting that I 'take a breath' - since I am delivering my points by the medium of type, my breathing is not an issue, but thanks for your concern anyway.