The claimant worked as a pastoral administrator and work experience manager in a secondary school. The school received complaints after she posted comments on Facebook about relationships education in primary schools so she was suspended, an investigation took place and she was dismissed. The claimant issued proceedings in the ET claiming direct discrimination or harassment due her protected beliefs but the ET concluded the respondent's actions had been because the claimant’s posts could be reasonably considered to show she held homophobic and transphobic views. Accordingly their actions were not related to the protected beliefs.

The President, Mrs Justice Eady, allowed the appeal as the ET had failed to engage with the question identified in Eweida.Had it done so, it would have concluded there was a close or direct nexus between the claimant’s posts and her protected beliefs. As the ET had erred in its approach to the determination of the “reason why” question in this case, the matter was remitted for re-hearing on this issue. At [94] The President sets out some guidance on the approach the ET should adopt.