Nicholson v Grainger Plc
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judgment Date | 03 November 2009 |
| Neutral Citation | UKEAT/2203367/08 ,UKEAT/219/09 |
| Date | 03 November 2009 |
| Court | Employment Appeal Tribunal |
Employment Appeal Tribunal
Before Mr Justice Burton
An asserted philosophical belief that mankind was heading towards catastrophic climate change and the claimant had a moral duty to lead a life in a manner that mitigated that catastrophe for the benefit of future generations and to persuade others to do the same, if genuinely held, was capable of a ttracting legal protection under equal treatment legislation.
Mr Justice Burton, sitting alone in the Employment Appeal Tribunal, so held when dismissing an appeal from a decision of Employment Judge David Sneath at London (Central) on March 18, 2009, that the claimant, Mr Tim Nicholson, was entitled to pursue a claim of discrimination on the ground of his as serted belief against his employers, Grainger plc. Regulation 3 of the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations (SI 2003 No 1660) provides that a person discriminated against another if, on the grounds of religion or belief, he treated him less favourably than he would another. Regulati on 2 defined "belief" as "any religious or philosophical belief". Mr John Bowers, QC, for the employers; Miss Dinah Rose, QC and Mr Ivan Hare for Mr Nicholson.
MR JUSTICE BURTON said that the three main issues were: how far, if at all, the belief said to qualify for protection under the regulations was required to be similar to a religious belief; what, if any, limits should be placed upon the words "philosophical belief", and whether the a uthorities in relation to the European Convention on Human Rights were of relevance.
It was necessary to place some limit on the definition of "philosophical belief" for the purposes of the regulations.
By reference to the jurisprudence in the European Court of Human Rights the following limitations applied: the belief had to be genuinely held; it had to be a belief and not an opinion...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The Queen (on the Application of James Dowsett) v Secretary of State for Justice
...Appeal Tribunal had to review the domestic and Strasbourg jurisprudence on what constituted relevant philosophical beliefs in Grainger plc v Nicholson [2010] IRLR 4 in which Burton J said:- "26. I am satisfied that, notwithstanding the amendment to remove 'similar', it is necessary in order......
-
Mr W G A Jasper v Moo Free Ltd: 1403106/2020
...CA; Hewage v Grampian Health Board [2012] IRLR 870 SC; Nagarajan v London Regional Transport [1999] IRLR 572 HL; Grainger plc v Nicholson [2010] ICR 360; Gray v Mulberry Company (Design) Ltd UKEAT/00040/17; Cavendish Munro Professional Risks Management Ltd v Geduld [2010] ICR 325 EAT; Kilra......
-
Mr S Sohpal v The commissioners for HM Revenue and Customs: 1601578/2021
...life or behaviour of comparable importance to that normally found with religious beliefs. ….” 14. In Grainger plc and ors v Nicholson [2010] ICR 360 The Employment Appeal Tribunal drew on a body of domestic and European Court of Human Rights case law to set out some threshold criteria for e......
-
Maya Forstater v CGD Europe and Others
...democratic society”. Accordingly, the Tribunal concluded that the belief did not satisfy the fifth criterion in Grainger plc v Nicholson [2010] ICR 360 (“Grainger V”). The Claimant Held, allowing the appeal, that the Tribunal had erred in its application of Grainger V. A philosophical belie......
-
Gender-Critical Views Protected Under The Equality Act
...disagreed with the Employment Tribunal, finding that: it had incorrectly applied the fifth criterion set down in Grainger plc v Nicholson [2010] ICR 360, which the EAT considered operated only to exclude from protection under the Equality Act views akin to Nazism and totalitarianism. The EA......
-
Remembrance Day Discrimination?
...by the Equality Act 2010. The test applied by the Judge was that set out in a previous case, Grainger plc and others v Nicholson [2010] IRLR 4. In that case the EAT gave guidance as to what amounts to a philosophical belief for the purposes of the discrimination legislation. It stated that ......
-
The definition of discrimination
...rest of the person’s life. 22 14 To which cases go on appeal from employment tribunals in Great Britain. 15 Employment Appeal Tribunal [2010] IRLR 4, [2010] ICR 360 3.11.2009, available at: www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2009/0219_09_0311.html . 16 Employment Tribunal, Hashman v Milton Park ......
-
Outside the Equality Act
...on the circumstances) on the stan-dard scale, Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974, sections 9(6) and 9(7).49. Grainger v. Nicholson [2010] ICR 360 and Hashman v. Milton Park (Dorset) Ltd (t/a OrchardPark) ET/3105555/09, respectively. With regard to sexual orientation, whilst many wouldview......
-
Achieving social mobility
...for homophobia. See EA2010, s.23(3), and Preddy v. Bull (2012) EWCA 83 (appeal pending).82. Defining ‘belief’: Grainger v. Nicholson (2010) IRLR 4 (EAT), (24)–(28). See also thedrafting of direct religious discrimination, and its two attempts to retain symmetry yetprevent an employer exclud......
-
Religious rights in historical, theoretical, and international context: Hobby Lobby as a jurisprudential anomaly?
...conclusion that a religious right exists and discussing Senator Kennedy's proposal regarding RFRA). (257.) Grainger PLC v. Nicholson, [2010] I.C.R. 360, [26] (Burton, J.) (Eng.) (quoting Malcolm D. Evans, Religious Liberty and Non-Discrimination, in NON-DISCRIMINATION Law: Comparative Persp......