The Claimant declared his religion to be Christian. He had previously posted online comments in which he declared same sex marriage and homosexuality were sins. He applied for a job with the Respondent. The Respondent is committed to promoting equality, diversity and inclusion and has a strong track record of specifically adapting and tailoring its services to the LGBTQI+ community. The Claimant was offered the job subject to references but the offer was withdrawn when the Respondent discovered he had posted the comments which raised doubts about his suitability for the role. The Claimant brought complaints of direct belief discrimination. So far as is relevant to the appeal, the Claimant asserted in the list of issues that he had been discriminated against because of his belief by the Respondent (1) requiring him to attend a second interview; (2) not offering him employment in the role of discharge mental health support worker; and/or (3) putting a reverse burden of proof on the Claimant to prove that he would not discriminate because of his religious beliefs. The ET dismissed his claims and he appealed.

The EAT allowed the appeal. To the extent that the decision to call the Claimant to the second interview was because of a concern that service users might have reacted badly merely to the fact that the Claimant held the religious beliefs in question that would be treatment because of the belief and not capable of justification. The ET did not properly analyse this aspect of the complaint.