In a landmark Employment Tribunal decision, the Employment Tribunal decided fervent anti fox hunting campaigner Mr Hashman was protected from discrimination because of his beliefs in animal welfare.
Mr Hashman was employed by a garden centre. He was a keen animal rights campaigner and had given evidence in support of prosecutions for illegal hunting. When his employers discovered his fervent anti hunting views he was dismissed. He argued that his dismissal was because of his belief in animal rights and that the dismissal was discriminatory.
The law protects employees from being discriminated against because of their religion or belief. In order to qualify for protection as a belief the claimant must hold a philosophical belief. In this ground breaking decision Mr Hashman successfully argued that his fervent objection to fox hunting and fundamental belief in the sanctity of animal life amounted to philosophical beliefs capable of protection. The Tribunal also found that he was dismissed because of those beliefs.
This is the first time that anti fox hunting beliefs have been held to be protected. In a previous case of Grainger Plc v Nicolson the Employment Appeal Tribunal decided that a fundamental belief in the impact of climate change was protected and set out guidelines for future cases. The employee must genuinely hold the belief in question. It must be a belief and not just an opinion based on the present state of information available. The belief must be about a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour and it must attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance and it must be worthy of respect in a democratic society. Applying these guidelines it is unlikely that, for example, a belief in the Star Wars Jedi way of life would be protected.
This latest case is a salutary warning to employers that treating staff differently or dismissing them because their beliefs differ to those held by the employer may be discriminatory and could land them in the Employment Tribunal.