- Religion or belief: Court of Appeal considers victimisation, manifesting belief and ECHR rights (Page v Lord Chancellor; Page v NHS Trust Development Authority)
- What are the practical implications of these judgments?
- Direct discrimination
- Justification in the context of indirect discrimination and Article 9 ECHR (right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion)
- Justification under Article 10 ECHR (right to freedom of expression)
- What is the relevant background?
- Relevant law
- Factual background
- Decisions of the employment tribunals
- Decisions of the EAT
- What did the Court of Appeal decide?
- Page v (1) The Lord Chancellor (2) The Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales
- Page v NHS Trust Development Authority
- Case details
Employment analysis: The Court of Appeal (1) endorses application of the principle in Martin v Devonshires Solicitors as a defence in appropriate victimisation claims, (2) endorses the distinction in religion or belief direct discrimination cases between holding the belief and manifesting it, and (3) discusses justification of infringements to the ECHR rights to freedom of thought, conscience and religion and freedom of expression, in this related pair of appeals.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial