Mr B Dybowski First v The Bishop of Llandaff Church In Wales High School Second Respondent: Staffroom Education Ltd — 2024

The claimant was a teaching assistant supplied by Staffroom Education Ltd and placed at The Bishop of Llandaff Church in Wales High School from 19 October 2022. At a staff training session on 23 March 2023 he raised views about marriage, abortion and sharia law. The tribunal found that he said true marriage was between a man and a woman and that he could just about tolerate this, and that abortion was the murder of innocent life for unborn children. It did not accept that he used the phrase about men claiming to be women, and it held that his criticism of aspects of sharia law, as pleaded, was an opinion rather than a protected belief. The tribunal accepted the marriage, abortion and fixed-sex beliefs as capable of protection under section 10 EqA 2010, but not the sharia-law formulation relied on by the claimant.

The next day Mr Belli met the claimant and discussed the training, the school's ethos and EWC social media guidance. During the recorded conversation the claimant pressed Mr Belli on immigration, same-sex marriage, abortion and gender identity, and Mr Belli said he would speak to the agency and later made the EWC referral. The tribunal found that, at that stage, Mr Belli knew the claimant had previously been asked to leave another placement after privately expressing a contrary view about a transitioning pupil, but did not know of deliberate misgendering. The claimant was then asked to leave the school, sent an email that was copied to a pupil, and later publicised the dispute on social media and in the press. The first respondent also wrote to parents in May and July 2023 to explain the decision and respond to the publicity.

The tribunal applied Grainger, Forstater, Page and Higgs when considering the protected belief issues and the distinction between belief and manifestation. It held that the claimant's protected beliefs were the Biblical marriage view, the abortion view and the fixed-sex / no gender-fluidity view. The sharia-law point was too narrow and read more like an opinion about some aspects of sharia rather than a protected philosophical belief. It also found that only the first two protected beliefs were manifested at the training on 23 March 2023, while the fixed-sex belief was raised in the meeting with Mr Belli.

The harassment claim was dismissed. The tribunal accepted that much of the first respondent's conduct was related to the claimant's protected beliefs, but found that the purpose of the first respondent's actions was to prevent him from expressing those beliefs in the school environment or on social media in the manner he had already used, and to protect pupils, staff and the school's position. It found that the 3 July 2023 letter was sent to give parents the school's version of events and to address the media coverage and threats, and that the second respondent acted because of the claimant's conduct after leaving the school, not because of his beliefs. On that basis the conduct did not have the proscribed purpose or effect under section 26 EqA 2010.