header-logo header-logo

14 January 2010
Issue: 7400 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Employment

McFarlane v Relate Avon Ltd [2009] All ER (D) 233 (Dec)

In considering a complaint of discrimination on the ground of religious belief, contrary to the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003, SI 2003/1660, the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that persons with a religious belief were likely to manifest that belief in their conduct. 

In some cases where an employer objected to such a manifestation it might be impossible to see any basis for the objection other than an objection to the belief which it manifested; and in such a case a claim by the employer to be acting on the grounds of the former but not the latter might have been regarded as a distinction without a difference. 

But in other cases there would be a clear and evidently genuine basis for differentiation between the two, and in such a case the fact that the employee’s motivation for the conduct in question might be found in his wish to manifest his religious belief did not mean that that belief was the ground of the employer’s action.

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: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll