Thomas v Surrey & Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust

This case dealt with the tricky issue of when a belief is potentially under the Equality Act, which protects discrimination on the grounds of religion or belief, within certain parameters.  Here the employee had a belief in English nationalism and the Tribunal had to look at whether or not that was protected under the Equality Act 2010.  

In dealing with whether a belief is protected, a Tribunal has to apply relevant case law.  A lead case which was referred to in this case was Grainger v Nicholson (2010) EAT.  In that case the Judge (Judge Burton) set out 5 criteria for protection:-

1. The belief must be genuinely held;
2. It must be a belief and not an opinion or viewpoint based on the present state of information available;
3. It must be a belief as to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour;
4. It must attain a certain level of courteous, seriousness, cohesion and importance;
5. It must be worthy of respect in a democratic society, be not incompatible with human dignity and not in conflict with fundamental rights of others.

The final requirement excludes beliefs that reject social pluralism or that indignify others. 

In Thomas the Tribunal found that many aspects of the Claimant’s belief would be protected under the Equality Act 2010 because he expressed highly anti-Islamic views (including possible deportation), the Claimant’s belief would not be protected under criteria (v) above. 

The Claimant appealed to the EAT but the EAT agreed with the original Tribunal. 

Comment

In light of the recent riots in the news, this case makes interesting reading.  It is a reminder that in a pluralistic society, a wide variety of beliefs are protected under the Equality Act and indeed there is a relatively low bar for protection, however where one’s belief effectively amounts to hate speech or the denigration of the rights of others, then the Courts and the Tribunals are likely to find them not protected.