UK Court rules in favour of Christian school worker dismissed for sharing anti LGBT+ views

A Christian school employee has secured an important victory in the Court of Appeal following her dismissal for expressing views on LGBT+ relationships education. Kristie Higgs, formerly a pastoral administrator and work experience manager at Farmor’s School, Gloucestershire, was sacked in 2019 after she shared Facebook posts critical of plans to teach about LGBT relationships in primary schools.

The mother-of-two initially confronted a rule against her in June 2023 from the Employment Appeal Tribunal, yet the matter has been escalated, with her lawyers contending that sending the case back for another tribunal decision was redundant.

In a noteworthy judgment handed down on Wednesday, judges sided with Higgs, deeming the previous instruction to revert the case to employment tribunal as “unlawfully discriminatory”. Expressing the court’s viewpoint, Lord Justice Underhill, accompanied by Lord Justice Bean and Lady Justice Falk, explained: “In the present case the claimant, who was employed in a secondary school, had posted messages, mostly quoted from other sources, objecting to Government policy on sex education in primary schools because of its promotion of ‘gender fluidity’ and its equation of same-sex marriage with marriage between a man and a woman.”

The court acknowledged that the claimant’s views on gender and same-sex marriage fall under the protection of the Equality Act, stating: “It was not in dispute… that the claimant’s beliefs that gender is binary and that same-sex marriage cannot be equated with marriage between a man and a woman are protected by the Equality Act.”

Despite this, the school where she worked defended her termination, claiming that her social media posts were “intemperately expressed” and contained “The school sought to justify her dismissal on the basis that the posts in question were intemperately expressed and included insulting references to the promoters of gender fluidity and ‘the LGBT crowd’ which were liable to damage the school’s reputation in the community: the posts had been reported by one parent and might be seen by others.”

Which they feared could tarnish the school’s standing within the community after being flagged by a parent. However, the tribunal found these reasons insufficient for dismissal since: “However, neither the language of the posts nor the risk of reputational damage were capable of justifying the claimant’s dismissal in circumstances where she had not said anything of the kind at work or displayed any discriminatory attitudes in her treatment of pupils.”

In the aftermath of the judgement outside the Royal Courts of Justice, Mrs Higgs expressed hope: “I pray that today will prove to be a landmark day for Christian freedoms and free speech.”

She continued advocating for the right of Christians to share their views without facing workplace penalties: “Christians have the right to express their beliefs on social media and at other non-work-related settings without fear of being punished by their employer.”

Mrs Higgs found herself in hot water after engaging with online content that critiqued the relationship education programme ‘No Outsiders In Our School’, aimed at primary school students, which involved learning about the Equality Act through books.

Mrs Higgs, who used her maiden name to post on a private page, shared two posts in October 2018 with around 100 friends. One of these posts mentioned “brainwashing our children” An anonymous complaint led to the school suspending Mrs Higgs and, following a disciplinary hearing, she was dismissed for gross misconduct.

The school has previously refuted claims that Mrs Higgs was dismissed due to her religious beliefs, stating that the language used in her posts was the reason for her dismissal. In a 2020 ruling, an employment tribunal acknowledged that Mrs Higgs’ religion is a “protected characteristic” under the Equality Act, but upheld the school’s lawful dismissal.

This decision was overturned by the Employment Appeal Tribunal in 2023, and the case was sent back for reconsideration. However, Richard O’Dair, representing Mrs Higgs, argued in written submissions to the Court of Appeal last October that the EAT provided “highly unsatisfactory guidance” risking Mrs Higgs being “will be denied justice once again”.

He stated that her posts were “political speech contributing to the ongoing debate on a matter of public interest” and “a manifestation of her religious beliefs”. He also noted that Mrs Higgs, who denies being homophobic or transphobic, had worked with LGBT pupils without any allegations of discrimination against them.

Sean Jones KC, representing the school, suggested in his written submissions to the court that remitting the case was “the appropriate course” as “fuller reasons” for the decision were required.

He went on to say: “(Mrs Higgs) was not dismissed for manifesting (her beliefs) but because the manner in which it was manifested could reasonably have caused and did cause others to think she was expressing homophobic or transphobic views.”