Supreme Court set to announce ruling on Ashers cake row

THE UK’s highest court is set to rule on whether the Christian owners of a bakery discriminated against a customer by refusing to make a cake decorated with the words “Support Gay Marriage”.

Five Supreme Court justices will give their decision in London next Wednesday, October 10.

It follows the latest round of legal action against family-run Ashers Bakery in Belfast by gay rights activist Gareth Lee, who won his case initially in the County Court and then at the Northern Ireland Court of Appeal.

The bakery went on to fight the finding of discrimination at a Supreme Court hearing in Belfast in May. Owners Daniel and Amy McArthur have said the law risked “extinguishing” their conhe sciences. During the Supreme Court proceedings, the panel of justices including president Lady Hale, were told the owners were being forced to act against their religious beliefs.

David Scoffield QC, for Ashers, argued that the state is penalising the baking firm, with the courts effectively compelling or forcing them to make a cake bearing a message with which they disagree as a matter of religious conscience.

Mr Lee’s legal action was supported by Northern Ireland’s Equality Commission.

Controversy first flared when Mr Lee, a member of the LGBT advocacy group QueerSpace, ordered a cake in 2014 featuring Sesame Street puppets Bert and Ernie for a private function marking International Day Against Homophobia.

His order was accepted and paid in full but, two days later, the company called to say it could not proceed due to the message requested.

In the original court case, District Judge Isobel Brownlie ruled that religious beliefs could not dictate the law and ordered the firm to pay damages of £500.

Mounting an unsuccessful challenge at the Court of Appeal in Belfast in 2016, Ashers contended that it never had an issue with Mr Lee’s sexuality, rather the message on the cake.

Mr Scoffield told justices the case raised an issue of principle, since those with religious or philosophical convictions could be made to act against their beliefs.

Robin Allen QC, for Mr Lee, said: “This was a relatively small incident in his life which has become enormously significant and continues to be so. That is a heavy burden to bear.”