header-logo header-logo

01 February 2013 / Mark Hill KC
Issue: 7546 / Categories: Features , Human rights , Employment
printer mail-detail

Religion at work

Mark Hill QC considers the “reasonable accommodation” of religious belief in UK law

The eagerly awaited judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Eweida and Others v The United Kingdom (App Nos 48420/10, 59842/10, 51671/10 and 36516/10) has sparked considerable media attention. So much so, that the legal principles involved and their nuanced application to an increasing corpus of faith-related litigation may have been lost.

The judgment related to two pairs of cases. The first concerned a British Airways employee and a nurse who both complained that dress codes at their respective places of work prevented them from openly wearing a small cross on a chain around their necks. In the second pair, a registrar of marriages and a relationship counsellor refused to offer their services to same-sex couples on the basis that a homosexual lifestyle was incompatible with their religious beliefs. All four applicants took their case to Strasbourg for oral argument.

Good news for religious liberty

In three seemingly modest, but practically highly significant ways, the judgment

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

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
back-to-top-scroll