Kristie Higgs v Farmor's School

Kristie Higgs v Farmor's School

The dismissal of the claimant for her social media posts was not objectively justified. While the language of the posts was intemperate and potentially offensive, it was not grossly so, and there was no evidence of actual reputational harm or risk of discriminatory conduct at work. Dismissal was a disproportionate response and constituted unlawful direct discrimination on the ground of religion or belief under the Equality Act 2010. The employer’s justification based on reputational harm failed the proportionality test required by Article 9(2) and Article 10(2) ECHR.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Kristie Higgs; Respondent: Farmor’s School; Intervener: The Archbishops’ Council of the Church of England; Intervener: The Free Speech Union Ltd; Intervener: The Association of Christian Teachers; Intervener: Sex Matters; Intervener: The Equality and Human Rights Commission
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 December 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal (employment Discrimination) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; finding of unlawful discrimination substituted for remittal on the dismissal claim; remittal on other elements discouraged but not formally barred.
Legal Topics
Direct Discrimination, Harassment, Religion or Belief Discrimination, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Religion, Manifestation of Belief, Objective Justification, Reputational Harm, Social Media Conduct
Employment Law Equality and Discrimination Law Human Rights Law Direct Discrimination Harassment Religion or Belief Discrimination Freedom of Expression Freedom of Religion +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 5 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kristie Higgs

Claimant/appellant

Farmor’s School

Respondent

The Archbishops’ Council of the Church of England

Intervener

The Free Speech Union Ltd

Intervener

The Association of Christian Teachers

Intervener

Sex Matters

Intervener

The Equality and Human Rights Commission

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Appeal (employment Discrimination) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the dismissal of the claimant for social media posts expressing protected beliefs constituted unlawful direct discrimination or harassment under the Equality Act 2010.
  2. 2 Whether the employer’s interference with the claimant’s rights to manifest her beliefs and freedom of expression was objectively justified and proportionate under Articles 9 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Ratio Decidendi

The dismissal of the claimant for her social media posts was not objectively justified. While the language of the posts was intemperate and potentially offensive, it was not grossly so, and there was no evidence of actual reputational harm or risk of discriminatory conduct at work. Dismissal was a disproportionate response and constituted unlawful direct discrimination on the ground of religion or belief under the Equality Act 2010. The employer’s justification based on reputational harm failed the proportionality test required by Article 9(2) and Article 10(2) ECHR.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; finding of unlawful discrimination substituted for remittal on the dismissal claim; remittal on other elements discouraged but not formally barred.

Orders

  • The claimant’s dismissal was unlawful direct discrimination on the ground of religion or belief.
  • Remittal to the Employment Tribunal is only necessary for remedy and, if not agreed, for the disciplinary process claim.