B Dybowski v The Bishop of Llandaff Church In Wales High School & Anor

B Dybowski v The Bishop of Llandaff Church In Wales High School & Anor

The claimant's claims of harassment and direct discrimination are not well founded. The Tribunal found the respondents' actions were not because of the claimant's protected beliefs but due to the manner in which he manifested those beliefs, which was objectionable and justified restriction in the school context. The claimant's conduct breached professional and contractual standards, and the respondents' responses were proportionate and necessary to protect the rights and welfare of pupils and staff.

Parties
Claimant: Mr B Dybowski; First Respondent: The Bishop of Llandaff Church In Wales High School; Second Respondent: Staffroom Education Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Employment Tribunal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Harassment, Direct Discrimination, Protected Beliefs, Manifestation of Belief, Freedom of Expression, Social Media Conduct
Employment Law Equality Law Harassment Direct Discrimination Protected Beliefs Manifestation of Belief Freedom of Expression Social Media Conduct

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 6 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr B Dybowski

Claimant

The Bishop of Llandaff Church In Wales High School

First Respondent

Staffroom Education Ltd

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Tribunal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's beliefs are protected under s.10 Equality Act 2010
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was subjected to harassment related to religion or belief
  3. 3 Whether the claimant was subjected to direct discrimination due to protected beliefs

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's claims of harassment and direct discrimination are not well founded. The Tribunal found the respondents' actions were not because of the claimant's protected beliefs but due to the manner in which he manifested those beliefs, which was objectionable and justified restriction in the school context. The claimant's conduct breached professional and contractual standards, and the respondents' responses were proportionate and necessary to protect the rights and welfare of pupils and staff.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed

Orders

  • The claimant’s claim of harassment related to religious and protected beliefs is dismissed.
  • The claimant’s claim of direct religious and protected belief discrimination is dismissed.