The claimant worked for Dorset Police. The Employment Tribunal held that his belief that public service was improperly wasteful of money was genuine. He claimed that, when compelled to express those views, he had suffered discrimination on the ground of his philosophical belief. He appealed on the basis that the word ‘philosophical’ in the Equality Act 2010 was an unnecessary fetter on the scope of a belief in the light of European case law, and that the Employment Judge had adopted too high a threshold when applying the criteria in Grainger plc and Ors v Nicholson [2009] UKEAT 0219 09 0311, had been wrong to take into account the narrow focus of the belief, which arose out of and was manifested almost entirely in relation to his work for the Dorset Police, and had insufficiently explained why the claimant had not met the criteria.

On appeal, Langstaff J pointed out that Burton J had held in Grainger that there must be some limit placed upon the definition of philosophical belief for the purpose of the Regulations and had set out the boundaries as follows: the belief must be genuinely held; it must be a belief and not merely an opinion or viewpoint based on the present state of information available; it must relate to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour; it must attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance; and it must be worthy of respect in a democratic society, not incompatible with human dignity and not in conflict with the fundamental rights of others. On that basis, the remarks of the Employment Tribunal in respect of the third and fourth criteria were insufficient. The case was remitted for a fresh decision. [Frank Cranmer]