Smith & Anor v Manchester City Council [2025] EWHC 2987 (KB) (18 November 2025)

Smith & Anor v Manchester City Council [2025] EWHC 2987 (KB) (18 November 2025)

The Council's refusal to progress the claimants' fostering application constituted an interference with their right to manifest their religious beliefs, but this interference was justified and proportionate under Article 9(2) ECHR. The Council acted in accordance with statutory duties to promote the welfare and identity of looked-after children, and the claimants' beliefs would have made it difficult for them to meet the requirements to proactively promote diversity and support children of all backgrounds. The judge below applied the correct legal test, and there was no error in his proportionality assessment. The claim for direct discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 also failed, as...

Citation
[2025] EWHC 2987 (KB)
Parties
Appellant / Claimant: Matthew Smith; Appellant / Claimant: Michelle Smith; Respondent / Defendant: Manchester City Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / High Court (king's Bench Division) Judgment on Appeal From County Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Expression, Fostering and Adoption, Direct Discrimination, Proportionality, Public Authority Duties, Manifestation of Belief, Assessment of Foster Carers
Human Rights Equality and Discrimination Administrative Law Family Law Freedom of Religion Freedom of Expression Fostering and Adoption Direct Discrimination +4 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Matthew Smith

Appellant / Claimant

Michelle Smith

Appellant / Claimant

Manchester City Council

Respondent / Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / High Court (king's Bench Division) Judgment on Appeal From County Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the refusal to progress the claimants' application to become foster parents constituted unlawful interference with their rights under Article 9 ECHR (freedom of religion) and Article 10 ECHR (freedom of expression)
  2. 2 Whether the Council's decision amounted to direct discrimination under the Equality Act 2010
  3. 3 Whether the interference with the claimants' rights was justified and proportionate under Article 9(2) ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

The Council's refusal to progress the claimants' fostering application constituted an interference with their right to manifest their religious beliefs, but this interference was justified and proportionate under Article 9(2) ECHR. The Council acted in accordance with statutory duties to promote the welfare and identity of looked-after children, and the claimants' beliefs would have made it difficult for them to meet the requirements to proactively promote diversity and support children of all backgrounds. The judge below applied the correct legal test, and there was no error in his proportionality assessment. The claim for direct discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 also failed, as...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed; the judgment of the County Court is upheld.