In University of Bristol v Miller, the claimant was employed as a professor and was summarily dismissed for gross misconduct following public comments he made about Zionism, including comments directed at students and student societies.
The claimant brought claims including direct philosophical belief discrimination, belief-related harassment, unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal.
The Tribunal found that the claimant's anti-Zionist beliefs were protected philosophical beliefs and that the expression of those beliefs was a material factor in the decision to dismiss. It held that the dismissal was directly discriminatory, unfair and wrongful. However, it reduced his unfair dismissal awards by 50% for contributory fault, finding that his comments concerning students and student societies were blameworthy and had contributed to his dismissal.
The University appealed on nine grounds and the claimant cross-appealed on three grounds.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) largely upheld the Tribunal's decision, with one aspect of the remedy assessment remitted for further consideration. The claimant's cross-appeal was dismissed.
The EAT upheld the Tribunal's conclusion that the claimant's anti-Zionist beliefs qualified for protection as philosophical beliefs under the Equality Act 2010.
Crucially, the EAT upheld the finding that there was a composite reason for dismissal. It was not only the claimant's comments about students and student groups that...
U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., who has served as a congressman since 2013, has been subject to plenty of online misinformation over the years. Snopes has covered rumors claimi...