In the city’s first-ever case on civil partnerships, the Court of First Instance ruled against the woman applicant – known only as MK.  She filed a legal challenge against the government last June, arguing that the ban on same-sex civil partnerships was unconstitutional.

However, Judge Anderson Chow said that the government did not violate MK’s constitutional rights in denying her same-sex marriage, or in its failure to provide a legal framework for recognising same-sex relationships, such as civil unions.

In his 41-page judgment, Chow said he was taking a “strict legal approach” in deciding the case, even though he was aware that people in society have “diverse and even diametrically opposed views.”  Chow said that the definition of marriage under the Basic Law clearly referred to heterosexual ones.

To read more, click here!