Eweida v United Kingdom
An employer's refusal to allow an employee to wear a small cross visibly at work breached her freedom of religion, because insufficient weight was given to her right to manifest her belief.
Facts
Ms Eweida, a Coptic Christian, worked for British Airways at the check in desk. She wished to wear a small silver cross visibly over her uniform, but British Airways' uniform policy at the time did not allow visible religious items unless they could not be concealed. She was sent home, and later offered an administrative job, which she refused. The English courts rejected her claim for indirect religious discrimination. She applied to the European Court of Human Rights, together with three other applicants, Ms Chaplin, a nurse, Ms Ladele, a registrar, and Mr McFarlane, a relationship counsellor.
Legal principle
The European Court of Human Rights held that there had been a violation of article 9, the right to manifest religion, in Ms Eweida's case. The court said that a fair balance had not been struck between her desire to manifest her religious belief and the employer's wish to project a certain corporate image, given that the cross was discreet and that British Airways later changed its policy. However, there was no violation in the other three cases. In Ms Chaplin's case, the restriction was justified on health and safety grounds, and in the cases of Ms Ladele and Mr McFarlane, the employers had been entitled to require them to provide services to same sex couples.
Related cases on discrimination at work
- Archibald v Fife Council [2004] UKHL 32, [2004] ICR 954
- Chief Constable of the West Yorkshire Police v Khan [2001] UKHL 48, [2001] 1 WLR 1947
- Coleman v Attridge Law Case C-303/06, [2008] ECR I-5603
- Essop v Home Office (UK Border Agency) [2017] UKSC 27, [2017] 1 WLR 1343
- Forstater v CGD Europe [2022] ICR 1
- Grainger plc v Nicholson [2010] ICR 360
- Homer v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police [2012] UKSC 15, [2012] ICR 704
- Igen Ltd v Wong [2005] EWCA Civ 142, [2005] ICR 931
Studying employment law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
