Discrimination and Religious/Philosophical beliefs – a summary

Three recent EAT cases have highlighted the difficulties of the protection of philosophical and religious beliefs, and their impact on others.  At first sight the cases may appear to support the legal protection of some beliefs but not others, but in fact they address different aspects of the legislation and offer useful clarification.  

An EAT ruled in favour of the employer in two cases where as a consequence of their religious beliefs an employee had refused to work with same sex partners – one to perform civil partnership ceremonies and the other to offer counselling.  The findings established the principle that it is not direct religious discrimination to treat someone less favourably because of the way their beliefs are manifested when it conflicts with the legally protected rights of others.

The third case concerned the definition of ‘philosophical belief’.  Criteria were set out for what constitutes a belief in this context as follows:

• the belief must be genuinely held;
• it must be a belief, rather than merely an opinion or viewpoint based on the present state of information available;
• it must be a belief as to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour;
• it must attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance;
• it must be worthy of respect in a democratic society, be not incompatible with human dignity and not conflict with the fundamental rights of others;
• it must have a similar status or cogency to a religious belief but does not need to constitute or ‚Äòallude to a fully fledged system of thought‚Äô;
• it need not be shared by others.