Dismissal of BNP councillor

Case 7: The facts

Arthur Redfearn's employer had a contract with Bradford Council to provide transport for disabled people. It dismissed him on health and safety grounds, fearing violence and anger by its other employees and its service users, after becoming aware that he was standing as a candidate for the British National Party (BNP) in the Bradford Council elections.

Redfearn, who lacked the length of service to claim unfair dismissal, brought a claim of race discrimination. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) controversially upheld his claim, saying that race discrimination will have occurred "if racial grounds had a significant influence on the outcome" of an employer's decision, regardless of motive.

The ruling

The Court of Appeal overturned the EAT's decision. It accepted that "racial considerations" (the fact that most of the employer's service users and a significant number of its workforce were Asian) had played a part in the decision to dismiss, but said this did not mean the dismissal was "on racial grounds".

The court also rejected the argument that, since BNP membership was confined to white people, Redfearn had been discriminated against on the grounds of his race. It held he had been treated less favourably because of his BNP membership, which was a non-racial characteristic shared by a tiny proportion of the white population.

The Court said it would be incompatible with the purposes of the Race Relations Act to conclude that Redfearn had been a victim of race discrimination.

Serco Ltd v Redfearn [2006] EWCA Civ 659