header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
22 March 2013 / Sarah Johnson
Issue: 7553 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

The balancing act

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Sarah Johnson reviews recent guidance on how to balance the competing interests of employees

Balancing employees’ sometimes competing interests has always been difficult. Recent cases on religion and belief in the workplace have led to helpful new guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (the Commission).

Religion or belief in the workplace: A guide for employers following recent European Court of Human Rights judgments (the guidance) was published following the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in four combined cases; Eweida and others v UK (App Nos 48420/10, 59842/10, 51671/10 and 36516/10). These cases were brought by Christians, but the judgment impacts employees with any, or without any, religion or belief.

Facts

The claimants argued that UK law had failed to protect their right to manifest religion under (among other things) Arts 9 and 14 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Convention). 

Ms Eweida and Ms Chaplin both wanted to wear a visible cross in breach of their employers’ uniform policies.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Sidley—Jeremy Trinder

Sidley—Jeremy Trinder

Global finance group strengthened by returning partner in London

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: CPR tweak closes third-party disclosure gap
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
NLJ this week: Court of Appeals wrestles with Mazur fallout
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’
NLJ this week: Appeal court reins in ‘wrong defendant’ switcheroo

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: Driving test fraudsters steer towards jail
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
NLJ this week: Deepfakes demand data law muscle
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll