McFarlane v Relate Avon Ltd

McFarlane v Relate Avon Ltd

The application was dismissed because the appellant's argument was foreclosed by the binding authority of Ladele, which held that an employer's policy requiring equal treatment of service users regardless of sexual orientation is a legitimate and proportionate aim, and that refusal to comply with such a policy is not protected as a manifestation of religious belief under discrimination law.

Parties
Appellant: MCFARLANE; Respondent: RELATE AVON LIMITED
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Religious Discrimination, Indirect Discrimination, Direct Discrimination, Freedom of Religion
Employment Law Equality and Discrimination Law Human Rights Law Unfair Dismissal Religious Discrimination Indirect Discrimination Direct Discrimination Freedom of Religion

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MCFARLANE

Appellant

RELATE AVON LIMITED

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was unfairly dismissed for refusing to counsel same-sex couples on sexual matters due to his religious beliefs
  2. 2 Whether the employer's equal opportunities policy constituted direct or indirect discrimination on grounds of religion or belief
  3. 3 Whether the employer's policy was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim under the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because the appellant's argument was foreclosed by the binding authority of Ladele, which held that an employer's policy requiring equal treatment of service users regardless of sexual orientation is a legitimate and proportionate aim, and that refusal to comply with such a policy is not protected as a manifestation of religious belief under discrimination law.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal refused.