Couple Sues Zimmer Owner for Refusal to Host Due to Being Gay
Translated & summarized from Arutz Sheva by baba
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Couple sues Zimmer owner for alleged discrimination based on sexual orientation.
- Owner admits refusal, citing religious and ideological beliefs.
- Couple seeks NIS 157,000 in damages for humiliation and distress.
- Owner filed a countersuit, accusing the couple of setting a trap.
- Owner made controversial remarks about the assigned judge.
A religious gay couple is suing the owner of a Zimmer in Nofei Prat for approximately NIS 157,000, alleging he refused to host them minutes before Shabbat began upon discovering they were a couple. The owner, Yigal Canaan, does not deny the refusal, stating it was based on his religious and ideological beliefs, and has filed a countersuit against the couple. The plaintiffs, one an IDF officer and the other an active reservist in a combat role, had booked a night at Canaan's 'Nof Kenaan' Zimmer for NIS 550, paying a NIS 100 deposit. According to their lawsuit, upon their arrival shortly before Shabbat in January, Canaan noticed they were two men and, upon learning they were a couple, stated he could not host them due to his religious observance. The couple claims this refusal, occurring so close to Shabbat, forced them to travel to a relative's home, causing them distress and humiliation. They assert Canaan's actions constituted discrimination based on their sexual orientation, violating their dignity and causing significant emotional distress, especially given the timing. Their attorneys stated that Canaan's 'law-breaking behavior harmed the core of the plaintiffs' human dignity and deeply offended them,' calling for such behavior to be eradicated. Canaan, a former senior official in the Noam party, claims the couple knew his views and set a trap for him. He admits the facts but explains his actions as a stand against a progressive trend seeking to uproot tradition and as a defense of his home and family. In his lawsuit, Canaan also made disparaging remarks about the judge assigned to the case, calling her a 'secular, single, and questionable identity judge' and questioning her ability to rule on matters of religion, partnership, family, and deviance.
The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.
Centre 1Right 1