A number of recent tribunal decisions have shown that in applying the test set out by the EAT in Grainger plc v Nicholson in paragraph 24 of the judgment as to what constitutes a ‘philosophical belief’ under the Equality Act 2010 (EA 2010), that particular protected characteristic has a very wide scope, e.g. a belief in the sanctity of life extending to anti-fox hunting; a belief that lying is always wrong.
In Harron v Chief Constable of Dorset Police ET/3101466/2013, an employment tribunal, applying the Grainger test, had to decide whether a police worker's “profound belief in the proper and efficient use of public money in the public sector” is a protected philosophical belief under the EA 2010, as a preliminary point before his direct and indirect discrimination claims could go ahead.
The tribunal accepted that H is genuinely driven by an aspiration to save money in the public sector. In addition, the fact that his belief is worthy of respect in a democratic society had not been challenged by the employer. However, H’s belief is not a belief as to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour and its level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion or importance relates only to the workplace, and is not about human life and behaviour in general. In the tribunal’s judgment H’s contended belief was not so much a belief, but a set of values that manifests itself as a goal or principle operating in the workplace. Therefore his belief was not protected by the EA 2010.
Content Note
The aim is to provide summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. In particular, where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out full details of all the facts, the legal arguments presented by the parties and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Click on the links provided to access full details. If no link is provided contact us for further information. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, SM&B cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, we cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
