Woman wins appeal over transgender tweet
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has recently issued its long-awaited judgment in the matter of Maya Forstater v CGD Europe and Others.
In this case the Claimant’s complaints related to the non-renewal of her contract, she contends, because of her tweeting critical comments relating to gender recognition from her personal Twitter account. She brought a claim in the Employment Tribunal (ET) citing discrimination on the grounds that her gender-critical belief that sex is immutable and not to be conflated with gender identity amounted to a philosophical belief for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010 (Act).
To succeed in this claim, the Claimant first had to overcome the hurdle of demonstrating that her views about gender did in fact amount to a philosophical belief for the purposes of the Act. To do so (amongst other things) she needed to demonstrate that her beliefs were ‘worthy of respect in a democratic society’. The ET did not accept this argument at first instance, so the Claimant appealed to the EAT.
The EAT has allowed the appeal, stating that the ET erred in its application of the law when assessing the Claimant’s beliefs and whether they were worthy of respect. The judgment specifically referred to the fact that beliefs not worthy of respect in a democratic society are limited to such obviously deleterious views as ‘Nazism’ or ‘totalitarianism’.
In this case, whilst the Claimant’s beliefs could be deemed offensive by some, in the opinion of the EAT, they were still worthy of respect in a democratic society and, therefore, amounted to philosophical belief within the meaning of the Act. The case has now been remitted back to the ET to reconsider the claim in light of this ruling and we now await a decision on whether the dismissal will be deemed discriminatory or not.
The judgment has raised several interesting issues. Whilst it states that beliefs such as this, which could be offensive to some, can be protected under the Act, acting on those beliefs could be discriminatory. The judgment made it clear that whilst the Act could offer protection for holding a particular belief, it does not give employees (including the Claimant) licence to discriminate against others because of that belief.
Employers will need to ensure their staff are trained so that they understand that, whilst views may differ in the workplace and there is an element of protection available for the holding of a belief, discrimination is still unlawful, whatever the motivation.
If you have any questions about how this case may affect your business, please email or call our Employment Law team today on 0113 207 0000.
Partner and Head of Employment
Employment Law
PKelly@LawBlacks.com
0113 227 9249
@PaulLawBlacks
View profile