Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

Personal tools
Sections
You are here: Home Breaking news Cross-wearing British woman wins European court case

Cross-wearing British woman wins European court case

17 January 2013, 17:53 CET
— filed under: , , ,

(STRASBOURG) - A British Airways employee banned from wearing a cross said she felt "vindicated" after she won her case at the European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday.

Judges at the Strasbourg-based court ruled that Nadia Eweida had suffered discrimination at work, but it ruled against three other people from Britain who had filed cases claiming their religious rights had been violated.

Eweida, a 60-year-old Coptic Christian, took BA to the European court after British judges had upheld the airline's decision to bar her from wearing a cross.

The Strasbourg-based judges ruled that British judges had given "too much weight" to BA's desire to "project a certain corporate image" and Eweida's right to manifest her religious beliefs had been violated.

Eweida had worked since 1999 as a flight attendant for BA, whose uniform code stipulated that women must wear a high-necked shirt and a cravat, without any visible jewellery.

When the wearing of the cross provoked a dispute in 2006, she was offered an alternative job within the company, which she refused.

She eventually returned to work in February 2007 when BA's policy was changed to permit the display of religious symbols, with the cross and the star of David permitted.

"I'm very happy and very pleased that Christian rights have been vindicated in the UK and Europe," Eweida said from outside her lawyer's offices in London.

"The European court has specifically recognised... that I have suffered anxiety, frustration and distress."

Lawyers for Shirley Chaplin and Gary McFarlane, two of the three other applicants to the court, said they intended to appeal.

They said the rulings amounted to a "religious bar" to employment and Christians were finding themselves "out in the cold" in Britain while exemptions were applied to other faiths.

Chaplin, a 57-year-old geriatrics nurse, whose employer also stopped her wearing necklaces with a cross, lost her case after the court ruled that the reason for asking her to remove it "was inherently of much greater importance".

Her employer had said the cross posed a health and safety issue as it could interfere with open wounds.

Chaplin told a press conference in London that she was disappointed by the ruling.

"This to me is a bit like a wedding band so to take it off and to hide it is like divorcing God. I felt my beliefs were marginalised and ignored," she said.

McFarlane, 51, is a relationships counsellor who was sacked for gross misconduct after saying he might object to giving sex therapy advice to gay couples.

The other unsuccessful claimant was Lillian Ladele, a registrar disciplined after she refused to conduct same-sex civil partnership ceremonies.

McFarlane told reporters he was trying to achieve a "level playing field in our multi-cultural Britain".

"Reasonable accommodation just seems to me to be the right approach," he said, stressing that nobody had been denied services.

He said it was a "tragedy" that in "today's culture", Christians such as him had been branded homophobic "because you dare to say you can't do something that involves same sex".

While Chaplin took early retirement, McFarlane is working again, earning just above what he might expect to receive on welfare.

Prime Minister David Cameron tweeted that he was "delighted that (the) principle of wearing religious symbols at work has been upheld".

Following the rulings, John Sentamu, the outspoken Archbishop of York, released a statement in which he said: "Christians and those of other faiths should be free to wear the symbols of their own religion without discrimination.

"Christians are not obliged to wear a cross but should be free to show their love for and trust in Jesus Christ in this way if they so wish."

European Court of Human Rights


Document Actions