header-logo header-logo

Religion at work

01 February 2013 / Mark Hill KC
Issue: 7546 / Categories: Features , Human rights , Employment
printer mail-detail

Mark Hill QC considers the “reasonable accommodation” of religious belief in UK law

The eagerly awaited judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Eweida and Others v The United Kingdom (App Nos 48420/10, 59842/10, 51671/10 and 36516/10) has sparked considerable media attention. So much so, that the legal principles involved and their nuanced application to an increasing corpus of faith-related litigation may have been lost.

The judgment related to two pairs of cases. The first concerned a British Airways employee and a nurse who both complained that dress codes at their respective places of work prevented them from openly wearing a small cross on a chain around their necks. In the second pair, a registrar of marriages and a relationship counsellor refused to offer their services to same-sex couples on the basis that a homosexual lifestyle was incompatible with their religious beliefs. All four applicants took their case to Strasbourg for oral argument.

Good news for religious liberty

In three seemingly modest, but practically highly significant ways, the judgment

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll