Global Employment Law - Global News & Commentary on Labor and Employment Issues Worldwide

Mr Nicholson was employed by Grainger plc as its Head of Sustainability.  He was made redundant in July 2008 and he brought Tribunal proceedings, including a claim that the reason he had been selected for redundancy was because of his belief in climate change.  Before hearing the claims, the Tribunal first had to make a preliminary decision about whether belief in climate change could amount to a 'belief' that was protected under the Regulations.

The Tribunal held that, in Mr Nicholson's case, his belief in climate change did amount to a protected belief.  The evidence was that Mr Nicholson did not merely have a strong opinion or a sincerely held view - it was a genuine philosophical belief on which he based much of his life: how he lived and travelled, what he bought and ate.  This fell within the meaning of the Regulations.  The Tribunal felt that Mr Nicholson's belief gave "rise to a moral order" similar to that derived from the major world religions.

This decision does not mean that Mr Nicholson has proven his claim - he must still show that his dismissal was mainly attributable to his beliefs, rather than simply being a redundancy made for commercial reasons.  Nevertheless the case is of interest, despite the fact that it is a first instance decision, because it is the first case giving guidance on when a non-religious belief can become a protected belief.  The employer has indicated it intends to appeal the decision.

This entry was written by Alison Clements.