Hong Kong court: Denying same-sex spousal benefits unlawful
Law Journals
Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal said Thursday the government cannot deny spousal employment benefits to same-sex couples, in a ruling hailed as a major step forward for same-sex equality in the semi-autonomous Chinese territory.
The court overturned an earlier judgment, saying unanimously that denying same-sex couples access to spousal benefits is unlawful.
“It follows therefore that the ‘prevailing views of the community on marriage’ ... even if this can confidently be gauged in the first place, are simply not relevant to a consideration of the justification exercise,” the ruling said.
Although same-sex marriage is not recognized in Hong Kong, the judgment appears to move the territory further in that direction. Last year, the Court of Final Appeal ruled that the same-sex partner of a British expatriate married abroad was entitled to the same visa treatment as a heterosexual partner under immigration law.
Angus Leung, a senior immigration officer who brought the case on behalf of himself and his partner, Scott Adams, said the ruling was the culmination of a stressful four-year process.
“We understand that it is just a small step for the equality in Hong Kong,” Leung told reporters as he and Adams held hands outside the courthouse. “We think that as a small citizen, we shouldn’t be going through such a process to fight for such a basic family right.”
Leung urged the government to rectify discriminatory policies and legislation so that other couples wouldn’t have to undergo the same legal process.
Man-kei Tam, director of Amnesty International Hong Kong, called Thursday’s judgment a “huge step forward for equality” that brings Hong Kong “more in line with its international obligation to respect, protect and fulfil the rights of people with different sexual orientations.”
Tam also called on the government to review its laws, policies and practices to end all discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity and intersex status, saying, “No one should experience discrimination because of who they are or who they love.”
It isn’t clear what effect the ruling might have on private businesses and organizations, although some already offer benefits to same-sex partners as they compete for top talent in finance, marketing and other fields for which Hong Kong is famous. In another sign of acceptance, the city of 7.4 million people is also preparing to host the 2022 Gay Games.
Related listings
-
After Mueller, Trump says he'll fight Dems on all fronts
Law Journals 04/21/2019President Donald Trump declared Wednesday that he and his administration will battle House Democrats on all legal fronts after the special counsel's Russia report, refusing to cooperate with subpoenas and appealing to the Supreme Court if Congress tr...
-
Cristiano Ronaldo pleads guilty to tax fraud at Madrid court
Law Journals 01/23/2019With a guilty plea and a huge fine, Cristiano Ronaldo finally put an end to his tax ordeal in Spain.Nearly four years after an investigation was opened, Ronaldo appeared at a court in Madrid on Tuesday to plead guilty to tax fraud and agree to a fine...
-
No-cost birth control, now the norm, faces court challenges
Law Journals 01/17/2019Millions of American women are receiving birth control at no cost to them through workplace health plans, the result of the Obama-era Affordable Care Act, which expanded access to contraception.The Trump administration sought to allow more employers ...
Workers’ Compensation Subrogation of Administrative Fees and Costs
When a worker covered by workers’ compensation makes a claim against a third party, the workers’ compensation insurance retains the right to subrogate against any recovery from that third party for all benefits paid to or on behalf of a claimant injured at work. When subrogating for more than basic medical and indemnity benefits, the Texas workers’ compensation subrogation statute provides that “the net amount recovered by a claimant in a third‑party action shall be used to reimburse the carrier for benefits, including medical benefits that have been paid for the compensable injury.” TX Labor Code § 417.002.
In fact, all 50 states provide for similar subrogation. However, none of them precisely outlines which payments or costs paid by a compensation carrier constitute “compensation” and can be recovered. The result is industry-wide confusion and an ongoing debate and argument with claimants’ attorneys over what can and can’t be included in a carrier’s lien for recovery purposes.
In addition to medical expenses, death benefits, funeral costs and/or indemnity benefits for lost wages and loss of earning capacity resulting from a compensable injury, workers’ compensation insurance carriers also expend considerable dollars for case management costs, medical bill audit fees, rehabilitation benefits, nurse case worker fees, and other similar fees. They also incur other expenses in conjunction with the handling and adjusting of workers’ compensation claims. Workers’ compensation carriers typically assert, of course, that, they are entitled to reimbursement for such expenditures when it recovers its workers’ compensation lien. Injured workers and their attorneys disagree.