Religious discrimination

Case 12: The facts

Ms Ladele, a committed Christian, was employed by the Council as a Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages. Believing unions between same sex couples under the Civil Partnership Act 2004 were a sin, she refused to carry out civil partnership duties. Initially she was allowed to swap her duties, but this caused tensions in the department, particularly with two gay employees, who were upset. Eventually she was threatened with disciplinary action. An employment tribunal upheld Ladele’s discrimination claims. In particular, it felt that the Council placed a greater value on the rights of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transsexual community than it placed on Ladele’s rights as one holding orthodox Christian belief. The Council appealed.

The ruling

The EAT upheld the appeal, finding there was no religious discrimination. There was no direct discrimination because the Council had treated Ladele the same way it would have treated anyone who refused to carry out civil partnership duties, regardless of their religion. The way the Council had treated the two gay registrars was irrelevant because they had not sought to avoid their duties. There was also no indirect discrimination. Although the requirement to carry out civil marriages might put those of Ladele’s religion at a particular disadvantage, it was justifiable. It was clearly legitimate for a public authority to promote equal opportunities and to provide its service on a non-discriminatory basis.