A heterosexual couple who object to the "patriarchal baggage" of marriage have lost their latest battle for the right to enter into a civil partnership.
Rebecca Steinfeld, 35, and Charles Keidan, 40, want to secure legal recognition of their seven-year relationship through that route - but are prevented because the Civil Partnership Act 2004 says that only same-sex couples are eligible.
The academics, who live in Hammersmith, west London, and have a 20-month-old daughter, say that the Government's position is "incompatible with equality law" .
In November, they challenged High Court judge Mrs Justice Andrews's decision to dismiss their judicial review action.
But on Tuesday, the Court of Appeal dismissed their challenge.
Karon Monaghan QC told Lady Justice Arden, Lord Justice Beatson and Lord Justice Briggs that the issue was whether the bar on opposite-sex couples entering into civil partnerships was incompatible with Article 14 of the European Convention, which relates to discrimination, taken with Article 8, which refers to respect for private and family life.
She said: "They wish very much - and it is of very considerable importance to them - to enter into a legally regulated relationship which does not carry with it patriarchal baggage, which many consider comes with the institution of marriage."
Dan Squires QC for the Secretary of State for Education, who has responsibility for equalities within Government, said that a decision was taken, after two public consultations and debate in Parliament, not at this stage to extend civil partnerships to opposite-sex couples, abolish them or phase them out.
It was decided to see how extending marriage to same-sex couples impacted on civil partnerships before making a final decision which - if reversed in a few years' time - would be disruptive, unnecessary and extremely expensive.
He described the judge's decision as "unimpeachable".
The judges agreed the couple had established a potential violation of Article 14 of the Convention, taken with Article 8 but Lady Justice Arden dissented on the question of whether the policy of "wait and evaluate" was justified at present.
Ms Steinfeld said: "We are pleased that today's ruling has shown that the Government must act very soon to end this unfair situation.
"All three judges agreed that we're being treated differently because of our sexual orientation, and that this impacts our private and family life.
"All three rejected the argument that we could 'just get married'. All three emphasised that the Government cannot maintain the status quo for much longer - they are on borrowed time."
Ms Steinfeld said Lady Justice Arden accepted their case on almost every point.
"We lost on a technicality, that the Government should be allowed a little more time to make a decision.
"So there's everything to fight for, and much in the ruling that gives us reason to be positive and keep going."
Mr Keidan said: "The Court of Appeal has made it clear the status quo cannot continue.
"The Government should now recognise the benefits of opening civil partnerships to mixed-sex couples.
"The measure is fair, popular, good for families and children, and long overdue. They have everything to gain."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article