Page v NHS Trust Development Authority

Page v NHS Trust Development Authority

The disciplinary action was not because of the appellant's religion or belief, but because of his public expression of those beliefs in the media in a manner that risked undermining the Trust's ability to serve the LGBT community and maintain public confidence. The Employment Tribunal was entitled to find that any interference with the appellant's rights under Articles 9 and 10 ECHR was justified and proportionate. There was no direct or indirect discrimination or victimisation under the Equality Act 2010.

Parties
Appellant: Richard Page; Respondent: NHS Trust Development Authority
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Direct Discrimination, Indirect Discrimination, Victimisation, Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Expression, Equality Act 2010, Article 9 ECHR, Article 10 ECHR
Employment Law Equality and Discrimination Law Human Rights Direct Discrimination Indirect Discrimination Victimisation Freedom of Religion Freedom of Expression +3 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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Page

Appellant

NHS Trust Development Authority

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether disciplinary action against the appellant for public expression of views about homosexuality constituted direct or indirect discrimination or victimisation under the Equality Act 2010
  2. 2 Whether the appellant's rights under Articles 9 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights were infringed
  3. 3 Whether the disciplinary action was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim

Ratio Decidendi

The disciplinary action was not because of the appellant's religion or belief, but because of his public expression of those beliefs in the media in a manner that risked undermining the Trust's ability to serve the LGBT community and maintain public confidence. The Employment Tribunal was entitled to find that any interference with the appellant's rights under Articles 9 and 10 ECHR was justified and proportionate. There was no direct or indirect discrimination or victimisation under the Equality Act 2010.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The appellant shall pay the respondent’s costs of the appeal on the standard basis, subject to detailed assessment if not agreed.