判决理由
Under s.3 of the Human Rights Act 1998, the court has a broad interpretive power to read and give effect to legislation in a way that is compatible with Convention rights, even if this departs from the ordinary meaning of the words. This power goes beyond mere ambiguity resolution.
事实
Mr Godin-Mendoza lived with his same-sex partner in a flat. When his partner (the tenant) died, Mr Godin-Mendoza sought to succeed to the tenancy as the surviving 'spouse' under the Rent Act 1977. The statute referred to a person living with the tenant 'as his or her wife or husband'.
判决摘要
The House of Lords used s.3 HRA 1998 to read 'as his or her wife or husband' as including same-sex partners. This was necessary to avoid incompatibility with Articles 8 and 14 of the ECHR (right to private life and non-discrimination). The interpretive obligation under s.3 is strong and can require departure from the literal meaning.
关键引述
"Section 3 may require the court to depart from the unambiguous meaning the legislation would otherwise bear."
— Lord Steyn
后续处理
Leading authority on the breadth of the s.3 HRA interpretive obligation. Regularly cited in cases involving Convention-compatible interpretation.