Claimant v Touchstone Leeds

The tribunal found that the respondent's withdrawal of the conditional job offer on 10 June 2022 without discussion with the claimant breached his Article 10 rights to freedom of expression and constituted direct discrimination because of his religious beliefs. The withdrawal was disproportionate and the claimant should have been given the opportunity to provide assurances. However, the refusal to reinstate the offer after the 11 July 2022 interview was justified because the respondent had well-founded concerns about the risk to vulnerable service users discovering the claimant's views.

The tribunal found that none of the alleged conduct — including the requirements to attend LGBT awareness training, actively promote LGBTQI+ rights, or the terms of the second interview — amounted to harassment. The respondent's actions were a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aim of safeguarding vulnerable service users with mental health issues, many from the LGBTQI+ community. The tribunal applied the Bank Mellat proportionality test and found the measures justified.

The tribunal accepted that the respondent's PCPs (requirements to actively promote LGBTQI+ rights, support same-sex marriage, use chosen pronouns, etc.) put orthodox Christians at a group disadvantage compared to those of no faith or other faiths. However, the respondent justified these PCPs as proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aim of caring for vulnerable service users. The acute sensitivity and mental health needs of LGBTQI+ service users meant less discriminatory measures were not available.