Saturday 2nd May 2026
PUBLISHED ARTICLES
Article 15
Environmental Crusader 'Possibly' Protected Under Employment Equality (Religion
and Belief) Regulations 2003
Yesterday I happened to be in the same court room at the EAT when Mr Justice
Burton handed down a judgment, which had journos running for the phone.
Mr Nicholson has claimed that his dismissal n the grounds of redundancy
was an act of discrimination on grounds of 'philosophical belief'. The belief
his barrister argued fell under the definition of Employment Equality (Religion
and Belief) Regulations 2003 SI 2003/1660 (as amended by Equality Act 2006
s.77) as "any religious or philosophical belief".
Tim Nicholson, 42, of Oxford, was made redundant in 2008 by Grainger Plc
in Didcot, as head of sustainability.
He said his beliefs had contributed to his dismissal and in March a judge
at a preliminary hearing ruled that he could use employment equality laws
to claim it was unfair. Grainger appealed against this as it believed his
views were political.
The BBC reports the facts in its news story including a quote from Grainger:
'Grainger corporate affairs director Dave Butler said:
"This decision merely confirms that views on the importance of environmental
protection are capable of amounting to a philosophical belief.
"Grainger absolutely maintains, as it has done from the very outset of
these proceedings, that Mr Nicholson's redundancy was driven solely by the
operational needs of the company during a period of extraordinary market turbulence,
which also required other structural changes to be made within the company.'
John Bowers QC for Grainger argued that Mr Nicholson was describing a scientific
view rather than a philosophical belief, which themselves, 'are not capable
of scientific proof'.
The EAT (Burton J. sitting alone) has changed but not overruled, the employment
judge's decision and has agreed that the case can go to trial on the basis
that “the asserted belief held by the Claimant upon which he bases his
claim of discrimination is capable of being a belief for the purposes of”
the 2003 Regulations.
Emplaw reports: Mr Nicholson will need to provide (i) evidence directed
to the genuineness of his belief; (ii) evidence that it is a belief rather
than "an opinion or viewpoint based on the present state of information
available" and (iii) evidence from which the Tribunal could conclude
that his dismissal was on the grounds of that belief.
BBC:
The Regs:
Charles Price is a barrister at no5 Chambers
www.charlesprice.net
©2026 Charles Price - No part of this web
site may be copied, reproduced or printed in any format whatsoever (except
for the purposes of browsing this web site) without the prior permission
of the owner. All brands and trademarks are acknowledged.
| WEB DESIGN - SOL
MEDIA
