News

South Africa Constitution Treats Partners as Spouses
— August 23, 2002

Following a sequence of events reminiscent of the same-sex "marriage" debate in Canada, the South African Constitutional Court in late July unanimously ruled unconstitutional a government policy denying spousal employee benefit coverage to unmarried domestic partners. Under the challenged policy, a judge's married spouse was covered under various employee benefit provisions, while unmarried domestic partners received no such coverage.

The case, filed by Johannesburg High Court Judge Kathy Satchwell, challenged sections 8 and 9 of the Judges Remuneration and Conditions of Services Act and related regulations governing spousal benefits. Last year a lower court had concluded that the law was unconstitutional under provisions of the South Africa Constitution which prohibit discrimination on the basis of "marital status" and "sexual orientation." On appeal, the Constitutional Court agreed that the law was unconstitutional, holding that same-sex partners and married spouses must be treated equally, at least where there was a promise of mutual support between the partners.

Following the decision, Evert Knoeson, director of the Lesbian and Gay Equality Project, described the case as "another step toward the formal legal recognition of same-sex relationships." With this new precedent banning distinctions between married and unmarried couples, Knoesen went on to announce plans to file a same-sex "marriage" lawsuit in early August. In Canada, the Canadian Supreme Court ruled in 1999 that same-sex couples were entitled to marital benefits, setting the stage for the current "marriage" litigation underway in British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec.

Source: "Court Give Thumbs Up to Gay Financial Rights," South African Press Association, July 25, 2002.