In Miller v University of Bristol ET/1400780/22, the employment tribunal held that the professor's anti-Zionist beliefs are protected under the Equality Act 2010, and that his summary dismissal was an act of direct philosophical belief discrimination and unfair.
We look at three recent employment tribunal decisions concerning dress and jewellery codes that led to successful employment tribunal claims for religious discrimination and unfair constructive dismissal.
In Reilly v RT Management Bridgeton Ltd, an employment tribunal held that a line manager's failure to address an employee's request to have a sanitary waste disposal bin placed in the staff toilet because she was "the only female of menstruating age who used the toilet" constituted sex discrimination.
In Forstater v CGD Europe and others, an employment tribunal held that a consultant researcher was discriminated against when a think tank ended its relationship with her because of her gender-critical belief, which she had expressed on Twitter.
In Page v NHS Trust Authority, the Court of Appeal held that the reason for disciplinary action and "termination" of office was because the director, a "devout" Christian, had expressed his views on homosexuality and same-sex adoption in the media, not because he held those views.
In Higgs v Farmor's School, an employment tribunal considered whether or not an employee's belief opposing gender fluidity constituted a philosophical belief within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010.
In Casamitjana v The League Against Cruel Sports, an employment tribunal held that ethical veganism is capable of being a philosophical belief under the Equality Act 2010.
In Gray v Mulberry Company (Design) Ltd, the Court of Appeal held that the employee's refusal to sign a copyright agreement was not due to any philosophical belief, but to her wish to achieve greater protection for her own creative work.