header-logo header-logo

01 August 2013 / Jon Holbrook
Issue: 7571 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

Odd one out

istock_000006128063large

Jon Holbrook fears the emergence of a disturbing new tort of intolerance

In recent years, a new cause of action has come to the fore that seeks to enforce intolerance. It gives rise to civil claims with very severe consequences, including the loss of a job. Recent defendants who have suffered this way include Lillian Ladele, the Islington registrar who refused to perform same sex registrations, Gary McFarlane, the counsellor who refused to give sex therapy to homosexuals, and Mr and Mrs Bull and Susanne Wilkinson, who refused to allow unmarried couples to share the same bed in their bed and breakfast establishments.

Non-conformist views

The tort of intolerance can be deployed against those who merely express non-conformist opinions. Dr Hans-Christian Raabe was sacked from his post as a government drugs adviser for having previously expressed anti-gay views in a paper entitled Gay marriage and Homosexuality: some medical comments.

Although the tort of intolerance is often crystallised by a clash between Christianity and homosexuality, other non-conformist beliefs can be targeted. When Arthur Redfearn’s membership

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll