discharged from armed forces due to their homosexuality.
JR of discharge.
UK policy was irrational and in breach of inter alia ECHR.
of Appeal dismissed case.
Applicants’ right to respect for their private lives under Article 8 of ECHR
was violated by MOD’s investigation and their subsequent discharge.
interferences were in pursuance of legitimate aims, ie natural security and
prevention of disorder, had not been shown that interferences were ‘necessary
in a democratic society’ to attain those aims.
Had also been violation of Article 13, in that applicants had no ‘effective
remedy’ before a natural authority in respect of violation to their right under
of irrationality in natural courts: court not entitled to interfere with
exercise of administrative discretion on substantive grounds save where court
was satisfied decision unreasonable, in sense that it was beyond range of
responses open to reasonable decision-maker.
so high did not answer question of whether interference proportionate to
natural security aims.