In a written decision, Court of Appeal judges Jeremy Poon, Aarif Barma, and Thomas Au argued that queer married couples should be treated equally because the agency’s care of them was” prejudiced in nature.”
The judges stated in their decision that” the differential treatment in the present circumstances is a more serious form of indirect discrimination than most instances because the standard is one which same-sex couples can rarely meet.”
Henry Li, one of the people involved in the second scenario, expressed his gratitude for the decision in a Facebook post.
The decision was also praised by the right organization Hong Kong Marriage Equality, which stated that it had made it clear that” bias and unequal treatment on the basis of sexual orientation has no place in public policy selections.”
In September, Hong Kong’s leading court rejected same-sex unions but acknowledged the need for them” for access to an alternative authorized framework in order to meet basic social needs.”
Two years were given to the state to develop the platform.
A committed lesbian couple argued that both women may have parental rights over their kid born through mutual IVF, and a Hong Kong court sided with them in September.
In different parts of Asia, protesters are keeping an eye on Hong Kong’s authorities in the hopes that their decisions will have an impact on reform initiatives abroad.