Grainger Plc and Others v Nicholson: EAT 3 Nov 2009

EAT RELIGION OR BELIEF DISCRIMINATION
A belief in man-made climate change, and the alleged resulting moral imperatives, is capable, if genuinely held, of being a philosophical belief for the purpose of the 2003 Religion and Belief Regulations. The belief must be of a similar cogency or status to a religious belief, the ECHR jurisprudence is directly material and the limitations on the concept and extent of a philosophical belief can be derived from that, without the need to place any additional limitation on the nature or source of the belief.
The claimant asserted that a belief in man-made climate change was a protected characteristic.
Held: It could be.
Burton J set out five criteria which must be satisfied if a belief is to be protected under section 10: ‘(i) The belief must be genuinely held.
(ii) It must be a belief and not . . an opinion or viewpoint based on the present state of information available.
(iii) It must be a belief as to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour.
(iv) It must attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance.
(v) It must be worthy of respect in a democratic society, be not incompatible with human dignity and not conflict with the fundamental rights of others . . .’

Burton J
Times 11-Nov-2009, [2009] UKEAT 0219 – 09 – 0311, [2010] IRLR 4, [2010] ICR 360
Bailii
Equality Act 2010 10, European Convention on Huma Rights 9, Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v Williams 1953
The defendant, a sup-post office mistress, appealed against her conviction for larceny by the use of of ‘false pretences’.
Held: When considering the word ‘fraudulently’ from the phrase ‘fraudulently and without claim of right made in good . .
CitedArrowsmith v United Kingdom ECHR 12-Oct-1978
(Commission) Article 9 is apt to include a belief such as pacifism, which could be a philosophy. However, Miss Arrowsmith distributed leaflets to soldiers, urging them to decline service in Northern Ireland. This was dictated by her pacifist views. . .
CitedCampbell and Cosans v The United Kingdom ECHR 25-Feb-1982
To exclude a child from school for as long as his parents refused to let him be beaten ‘cannot be described as reasonable and in any event falls outside the State’s power of regulation in article 2’. The Convention protects only religions and . .
CitedEweida v British Airways Plc EAT 20-Nov-2008
EAT RELIGION OR BELIEF DISCRIMINATION
The claimant was a Christian who objected to BA’s policy of requiring jewellery to be worn concealed by the uniform. There were exceptions for those whose religions . .
CitedMcClintock v Department of Constitutional Affairs EAT 31-Oct-2007
The claimant had resigned as a magistrate after a refusal of his requirement that he not be asked to sit on adoption applications involving same sex couples.
Held: The request was an abdication of the duties of a magistrate, and his claim . .
CitedCampbell and Cosans v The United Kingdom ECHR 25-Feb-1982
To exclude a child from school for as long as his parents refused to let him be beaten ‘cannot be described as reasonable and in any event falls outside the State’s power of regulation in article 2’. The Convention protects only religions and . .

Cited by:
CitedHarron v Dorset Police EAT 12-Jan-2016
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
RELIGION OR BELIEF DISCRIMINATION
The Claimant had a belief (which the Employment Tribunal thought genuine) that public service was improperly wasteful of money. He . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Human Rights

Leading Case

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.377546