Veitch Penny LLP - Exeter | Crediton, Devon

Case

Nicholson v Grainger Plc

Issues

(1) Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003 (“the Regulations”)
(2) Whistleblowing
(3) Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998

Facts

Mr Nicholson was employed by the company as head of sustainability in September 2007 by the company, a property investment company.

He was dismissed on 31 July 2008. As he did not have sufficient continuity of service to bring a standard unfair dismissal claim, he was limited to bringing a claim under the discrimination legislation or the “whistleblowing” legislation (the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998).

After he was dismissed, he sent an e-mail to his employer stating that he considered his dismissal to be automatically unfair on the grounds that he had made a protective disclosure. Furthermore, he said that in his view the manner in which his employment was terminated constituted discrimination on the grounds of his philosophical beliefs in breach of the Regulations.

Decision

At a pre-hearing review, the Tribunal had to consider whether his views were capable of constituting a “philosophical belief” as defined by the Regulations.

Mr Nicholson argued that his beliefs relating to climate change and the need to cut carbon emissions were more than an opinion. He submitted that his beliefs affected how he lived his life. He said they were “… not merely an opinion but a philosophical belief which affects how I live my life including my choice of home, how I travel, what I buy, what I eat and drink, what I do with my waste and my hopes and my fears.”

The Tribunal had to consider the case of McLintock –v- Department for Constitutional Affairs [2008]. This case stated that the belief in question needed to have (i) sufficient cogency, (ii) seriousness, (iii) cohesion, (iv) importance, and (v) should be worthy of respect in a democratic society.

In giving its judgment the Tribunal Judge stated that his views commanded “the highest respect in democratic societies as can be seen from the conduct of modern global politics". It was concluded that Mr Nicholson’s views were capable of constituting a belief. His claim will now go forward and Mr Nicholson will need to establish that he was discriminated against because of those beliefs at a full hearing.

Comments

It was well established that philosophical views could include beliefs such as atheism, humanism etc. The Regulations talk about a “religion or similar philosophical belief”, equating the philosophical belief to a religious one. This decision is likely to lead to more complaints and more Employment Tribunal claims for employees with all sorts of views. Given the tests set out above, it is conceivable that many more views of this type could be successful at Tribunal.