The appellant was employed as a registrar. She refused to preside at same sex partnership ceremonies, saying that they conflicted with her Christian beliefs.
Held: The council’s decision had clearly disadvantaged the claimant, and the question was whether its policies were a proportionate way of achieving a legitimate aim. They were. The overarching policy was to promote of equal opportunities for all, and that required its employees to act in a non-discriminatory manner. The claimant’s own action discriminated against gays. It was simply unlawful for the claimant, once designated as a civil partnership registrar, to refuse to perform civil partnerships.
Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury, Master of the Rolls, Lord Justice Dyson and Lady Justice Smith
[2009] EWCA Civ 1357, Times 01-Jan-2010, [2010] IRLR 211, [2010] PTSR 982, [2010] 1 WLR 955, [2010] ICR 532, [2009] 1 AC 853, [2009] 1 All ER 957, [2009] All ER (D) 148
Bailii
Civil Partnership Act 2004, Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations (SI 2003 No 1660), Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007 (SI 2007 No 1263)
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – London Borough of Islington v Ladele EAT 19-Dec-2008
EAT RELIGION OR BELIEF DISCRIMINATION
The claimant was a Registrar who, amongst other things, registered marriages. When the Civil Partnerships Act came into force, she refused to participate in registering . .
Cited – Begum (otherwise SB), Regina (on the Application of) v Denbigh High School HL 22-Mar-2006
The student, a Muslim wished to wear a full Islamic dress, the jilbab, but this was not consistent with the school’s uniform policy. She complained that this interfered with her right to express her religion.
Held: The school’s appeal . .
Cited by:
Cited – Catholic Care (Diocese of Leeds) v Charity Commission for England and Wales and Another ChD 17-Mar-2010
The charity appealed against refusal of permission to amend its charitable objects as set out in the memorandum of association. The charity was successful as an adoption agency particularly in placing children who would otherwise have had difficulty . .
Cited – McFarlane v Relate Avon Ltd CA 29-Apr-2010
The employee renewed his application for leave to appeal against refusal of his discrimination claim on the grounds of religious belief. He worked as a relationship sex therapist, and had signed up to the employer’s equal opportunities policy, but . .
Cited – Johns and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Derby City Council and Another Admn 28-Feb-2011
The claimants had acted as foster carers for several years, but challenged a potential decision to discontinue that when, as committed Christians, they refused to sign to agree to treat without differentiation any child brought to them who might be . .
Cited – Bull and Bull v Hall and Preddy CA 10-Feb-2012
The appellants owned a guesthouse. They appealed from being found in breach of the Regulations. They had declined to honour a booking by the respondents of a room upon learning that they were a homosexual couple. The appellants had said that they . .
Cited – National Secular Society and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Bideford Town Council Admn 10-Feb-2012
The claimant challenged the placing of a prayer on the agenda of the respondent’s meetings.
Held: The claim succeeded. The placing of such elements on the Agenda was outside the powers given to the Council, and the action was ultra vires: . .
Appeal from – Ladele and McFarlane v The United Kingdom ECHR 12-Apr-2011
Statement of Facts and Questions to parties . .
At CA – Eweida And Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Jan-2013
Eweida_ukECHR2013
The named claimant had been employed by British Airways. She was a committed Christian and wished to wear a small crucifix on a chain around her neck. This breached the then dress code and she was dismissed. Her appeals had failed. Other claimants . .
Cited – Lee v Ashers Baking Company Ltd and Others SC 10-Oct-2018
The court considered whether a power of appeal to the existed.
Held: A power did exist under FETO, and the CANI having mistakenly excluded a power to appeal the Supreme Court could nevertheless hear it. Both appeals were allowed. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment, Human Rights, Discrimination
Updated: 12 November 2021; Ref: scu.384120