header-logo header-logo

25 January 2013
Issue: 7545 / Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

Human rights—Religion—Employment

Eweida and others v United Kingdom (App. Nos. 48420/10, 59842/10, 51671/10 & 36516/10)

European Court of Human Rights, Judge Thor Bjorgvinsson (president), Judges Bratza, Garlicki, Hirvela, Kalaydjeva, Vucinic and Gaetano, & L Early (section registrar), 4 September & 11 December 2012, 15 February 2013

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has reviewed the application of the right to manifest one’s religion under Art 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights in an employment context. As a general approach, where an individual complains of a restriction on freedom of religion in the workplace, rather than holding that the possibility of changing job would negate any interference with that right, the better approach is to weigh that possibility in the overall balance when considering whether or not the restriction was proportionate. The court has also stressed the margin of appreciation to be afforded to member states in carrying out that balancing exercise, when finding in favour of one applicant who had been precluded from wearing a cross at work, but not in favour of a second

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll