Jack Discrimination

To determine whether jack has suffered direct discrimination on the grounds of religion, he must prove he was treated less favourably in comparison to one without that protected characteristics under s 13 of the Equality Act. Here is it made obvious that Jack discipline was not due to his religious beliefs and was not treated less favourably that others who do not share his belief, but rather his objection to conduct his job and breaching the agency’s equality policy, which would apply to those without the protected characteristics.
On the other hand jack can argue he was a victim of indirect discrimination, under the EA 2010 s 19 (1) this occurs where “A discriminates against B through a provision, criterion and practice that discriminated …show more content…
working with adopters of the same sex puts him and those who share his religion or belief at particular disadvantage. Therefore he can refer to article 9 of the European Convention of Human Rights which proclaims every individual has the right and freedom of thought, conscience and religious practices (Baker & Smith, 2010) , in addition article 14 of the ECHR prohibits discrimination by providing the right and freedom to manifest ones religion (Baker & Smith, 2010). Although the articles do not stand alone and work in conjunction to prohibit the discriminations, however article 9 (2) is subjected to limitations to manifest belief or religion to meeting the need of a democratic society and guard the freedom of others. Although Jack right of thought and religion is emphasised his refusal to provide a service to the homosexual couple is an act which does not constitute with the democratic society, and is an occupational requirement hence making his claim questionable. In a comparable case Mclintock v Department for Constitutional affairs [2007] who was a practising Christian and was involved hearing cases regarding children, his refusal to place a child for adoption with same-sex couples forced him to resign. He claimed that this idea was a social experiment and did not agree. Nonetheless EAT dismissed his rationale was fact that it was based on an opinion and perceived logical …show more content…
Firstly her claim of direct, indirect discrimination and harassment was granted by the employment tribunal on the grounds that she was unlawfully discriminated against on the grounds of religion. However the employment appeal tribunal reconsidered the case and held no discrimination was committed and the council‘s actions was a legitimate aim to ensure the adherence of the dignity for all policy, it incorporated fundamental human rights and equality policy for Islington. The enforcement of this policy will not place a disadvantage on Ladele the court ruled, neither will it infringe in her religious beliefs as article 9 provides her with the freedom of religious worship. In addition, the court of appeal expressed as a public servant is it unlawful for one to disregard a service where itself can be discriminatory such as conducting a civil partnership, which is imperative under Equality Act (sexual orientation) regulation 2007 ( Smith & Baker, 2010). The intention to serve all member of the society equally is key requirement but rather her refusal to promote the equality hence the decision was said to be a proportionate, as it could only be achieved by requiring all registrars to conduct civil partnerships. Similarly, Jack wish to be allocated heterosexual couples is unlikely to be

Show More

Immigration Esssay Essays

Reference List: ABC 2009, Pop Culture Stereotyping Australia

Essay Aline Deneuve Case Analysis

discrimination of Arab Americans Essay

Ali the Boxer Essay

Aline Deneuve Case Analysis Essay

Jose Honey Essay

Examples Of Jack Merridew Guilty In Lord Of The Flies

How Did Jackie Robinson Break The Color Barrier

Running Loose CPT Essay