Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 14 NOVEMBER 2011

Employment Briefing - October 2011

A tribunal has held, at a pre hearing review, that an employee’s genuinely held beliefs that the 9/11 and 7/7 attacks were ‘false flag operations’ sanctioned by the UK and the US and that the approach of the UK government and police to counter terrorism were ‘utter shams’, did not satisfy the test of possessing the requisite ‘cogency and coherence’ to be a philosophical belief within the definition of the pre-Equality Act Religion or Belief Regulations 2003.

United KingdomEmployment and HR

Global conspiracy belief not protected

A tribunal has held, at a pre hearing review, that an employee's genuinely held beliefs that the 9/11 and 7/7 attacks were 'false flag operations' sanctioned by the UK and the US and that the approach of the UK government and police to counter terrorism were 'utter shams', did not satisfy the test of possessing the requisite 'cogency and coherence' to be a philosophical belief within the definition of the pre-Equality Act Religion or Belief Regulations 2003.

In Farrell v South Yorkshire Police Authority, Mr Farrell worked as a 'principal intelligence analyst' for the South Yorkshire police authority. He produced a document on 'strategic threat assessment' which expressed the views above. He was dismissed as his views were considered to be incompatible with his contract. At a pre hearing review to consider whether his views fell within the definition of 'philosophical beliefs' which would be protected from

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from