Hong Kong’s Court of Appeal dismissed a government attempt to deny same-sex married couples access to public housing, deeming it “discriminatory.”
Hong Kong’s Court of Appeal delivered a significant blow to the government’s efforts to deny same-sex married couples access to public housing, deeming such exclusion as inherently “discriminatory.”
This decision builds upon prior High Court judgments that had declared the housing authority’s actions as both “unconstitutional and unlawful.”
The crux of the matter involved two cases: one where a permanent resident’s application to rent public housing with his spouse was rejected due to their marriage in Canada not being recognized in Hong Kong, and another where a same-sex couple was denied joint ownership of a government-subsidized flat because their British marriage wasn’t acknowledged.
In a written judgment, Court of Appeal justices Jeremy Poon, Aarif Barma, and Thomas Au argued that the treatment of gay married couples by the housing authority was not only discriminatory but represented a particularly severe form of indirect discrimination, given the criterion was impossible for same-sex couples to meet.
This legal development is part of a broader trend in Hong Kong toward recognizing and protecting the rights of the LGBTQ+ community. While the top court ruled against same-sex marriage in September, it acknowledged the necessity for an alternative legal framework for same-sex couples to fulfill basic social requirements, granting the government a two-year window to establish such a framework.
Notably, this decision resonated beyond Hong Kong, with activists in other parts of Asia closely observing these legal proceedings. The hope is that Hong Kong’s progressive rulings may influence and inspire similar campaigns for LGBTQ+ rights and reform in other regions of Asia.