In a historic judgement, on 26th October 2011 the Employment Tribunal in Southampton found that life-long animal welfare campaigner Joe Hashman was discriminated against under the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003.
Mr Hashman said,
“My case against the Directors of Orchard Park Garden Centre in Gillingham, Dorset, under the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003 has included complex legal issues. I am indebted to the brilliance of Shah Qureshi and Nick Fry of Bindman’s LLP and my barrister Ivan Hare for their guidance, support and expertise over the last 2 years.
“I am proud to have established in Law my philosophical belief in the sanctity of life (including fervent anti fox hunting and hare coursing beliefs). On 26th October 2011 the Employment Tribunal in Southampton found that I was discriminated against because of these beliefs and so I feel vindicated in taking my case to them for judgement.
“The Tribunal has instructed that financial details of settlement remain a private matter. However, the truth is that succeeding with my case was all I ever wanted to achieve. Therefore I was happy to accept the first offer made to me be on behalf of Orchard Park alongside a public apology in respect of a defamatory memo written about me to their staff.”
The apology made by the Directors of Orchard Park to Mr Hashman reads as follows:
“We, the Directors of Orchard Park, unreservedly apologise to Mr Hashman for any injury to his feelings arising from the memo dated 18th November 2010.”
“In particular, we accept that Mr Hashman did not seek to mislead us or set us up in relation to his animal welfare beliefs and activities. Equally, we did not intend to suggest that Mr Hashman engaged in any bullying or mud-slinging.”
“We wish Mr Hashman well for the future, in particular in his career as a writer.”
JOE HASHMAN
It sends a clear signal that employers cannot discriminate against people merely because they disagree with their deeply held beliefs.
Married father-of-two Mr Hashman successfully argued that his views on fox hunting should be placed on the same legal footing as religious beliefs.
It was accepted that his concern about the evironment, animal welfare etc and in particular, his opposition to fox hunting, amount to a philosophical belief under the Employment Equality (Religion and Belief) Regulations 2003
