Petitioners, by means of a writ petition, challenged Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’), which made “carnal intercourse against the order of nature” a criminal offense punishable with life imprisonment. Petitioners argued that homosexuality, bisexuality, and other sexual orientations are equally natural and reflective of expression of choice and individuals should have the …Read more

The Claimant, Caleb Orozco, a citizen of Belize was a homosexual male and a health educator. In the Supreme Court of Belize, he challenged the constitutional validity of Section 53 of the Belize Criminal Code to the extent that it criminalized anal sex between two consenting male adults. Section 53 of the Criminal Code stated …Read more

The petitioners were same-sex couples from various U.S. states who challenged the constitutionality of bans on same-sex marriage in those states. They claimed that the bans violated the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Due Process Clause protects individuals from the arbitrary denial of life, …Read more

Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (the Section) penalized voluntary “carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal” and described them as “unnatural offences.” An offence under this Section was non-bailable and carried a maximum punishment of life imprisonment. Naz Foundation, the Petitioner, was an NGO working in …Read more

Overruled by Suresh Kumar Koushal and Anor. v. Naz Foundation and Ors. Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (the Section) penalized voluntary “carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal” and described them as “unnatural offences.” An offence under this Section was non-bailable and carried a maximum punishment of …Read more

Police officers entered a private residence in response to a report of a disturbance and came upon two men engaged in a sexual act. The men were arrested for and charged with violating a Texas state criminal law that prohibited “deviate sexual intercourse [defined as oral or anal sex] with another individual of the same sex.” …Read more

SL, an Austrian national, was born in 1981. SL is a homosexual and submits that he lives in a rural area of Austria where homosexuality is still taboo and suffered from the fact that he could not live his homosexuality openly and – until he reached the age of 18 – could not enter into …Read more

Living World Distributors (“LWD”) attempted to import two videos from the USA into New Zealand. The videos, which discussed aspects of homosexuality, opposed the granting of special rights to homosexuals and stated that homosexuality is one of the causes of the spread of HIV/AIDS. The videos were deemed suitable for audiences over 16 years old …Read more

The Applicants were both exemplary members of the Royal Air Force and had been discharged solely due to being homosexual. The first appellant was an enrolled nurse.  An anonymous female caller left a message on the applicant’s answering machine stating that she knew about the applicant’s homosexuality and afterwards informed the air force authorities. In a …Read more

The Applicants were the South African Human Rights Commission and a coalition of 70 organizations representing lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people in South Africa. They brought a constitutional challenge to various statutory provisions in South Africa criminalizing homosexual acts. The Applicants claimed that the statutes in question violated sections 9, 10 and 14 of …Read more