The claimants brought an action against the defendants under the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007 for a declaration and damages for discrimination on the grounds of their sexual orientation. The claimants were two men who were in a civil partnership who had, by telephone, booked a double room at the defendants' hotel. The defendants ran their hotel (which was also their home) along Christian principles and their policy, which was stated in clear terms on their website but of which the claimants were unaware, was to let double rooms only to heterosexual married couples. On arrival at the hotel, the defendants refused to allow the claimants to use a double room. Both parties relied upon their rights under Articles 8 (right to respect for their private and family life) and 14 (right not to be discriminated against) of the ECHR. The defendants relied upon their right to manifest their religion under Article 9 of the ECHR. The judge accepted that the running of an hotel along Christian principles could be regarded as manifesting one's religion. The judge held that the claimants had been directly and indirectly discriminated against on grounds of their sexual orientation contrary to regulation 3 of the Regulations, which he held were not inconsistent with the ECHR. The judge gave permission to appeal. [RA]