Get in touch 0117 325 0526
Get in touch 0117 325 0526
Facts: Mr Thomas (the claimant) was engaged to provide consultancy services for Surrey Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust). Not long after starting, his contract was terminated by the Trust when it discovered that he had not disclosed a spent conviction (electoral fraud resulting in a 7-month prison term).
However, Mr Thomas considered that the termination was due to his belief in English nationalism and political affiliation with the English Democrats. He brought a Tribunal claim for discrimination on the grounds of religion or belief.
Tribunal decision
At a preliminary hearing, the Tribunal held that Mr Thomas’ beliefs did not qualify as a protected belief under the Equality Act 2010, as they did not meet the relevant criteria. Whilst English nationalism could potentially amount to a philosophical belief, Mr Thomas’ anti-Islamic views (as expressed through his social media posts) meant that his beliefs did not. His views included that Muslims and their religion had no place in British society and that they should be forcibly deported from the UK. The Tribunal said these were not ‘worthy of respect in a democratic society’ as they did not respect human dignity and infringed on the fundamental rights of others.
Mr Thomas appealed to the EAT.
EAT decision
The EAT agreed with the Tribunal and dismissed the appeal. The EAT found that Mr Thomas’ views amounted to a generalised form of harassment targeting Islam. While political beliefs, including those related to nationalism, could be protected under the Equality Act, such protection has limits.
The EAT considered that Mr Thomas’ views crossed the threshold set out in Forstater v CGD Europe (that only extreme beliefs (akin to advocating totalitarianism or Nazism) would fall outside the protection of the Equality Act) as they were specifically aimed at promoting intolerance. Nor were the views capable of protection under the European Convention on Human Rights, as they were aimed at the destruction of the rights of others.
Implications: While the threshold for protection of beliefs under the Equality Act is low, those which promote hatred, intolerance, or the harassment or exclusion of minority groups will not be protected. (However, it is worth noting the EAT’s acknowledgement that, in principle, English (and other forms of nationalism) can be protected).
5.0/5