THE case of a school worker who was sacked in 2019 for her social-media posts about issues of gender and sexuality continued last week, in a two-day hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice, in London.
In 2018, the school worker, Kristie Higgs, wrote on Facebook that proposals to teach children about LGBTQ relationships in sex-education lessons amounted to “brainwashing”.
She alleged that “expressing and teaching fundamental Christian beliefs, relating to the creation of men and women and marriage, will in practice become forbidden — because they conflict with the new morality and are seen as indoctrination into unacceptable religious bigotry.”
In another post, she described the concept of gender fluidity as a “perverted vision”.
In 2019, after the posts were brought to the attention of Farmor’s School, Fairford, in Gloucestershire, Mrs Higgs was dismissed from her position as the school’s pastoral administrator and work-experience manager.
In 2020, an employment tribunal ruled that Mrs Higgs had been lawfully dismissed, as the decision had been made on the basis of her use of social media rather than with reference to her religious beliefs (News, 30 October 2020).
In 2023, however, the Employment Appeals Tribunal ordered a new tribunal. The judge, Mrs Justice Eady, said that the tribunal had “failed to engage with the nature” of Mrs Higgs’s rights, “which included the right to hold and to express views on controversial matters of public interest” (News, 20 June 2023).
The judgment made reference to an intervention by the Archbishops’ Council, which pointed to the “Pastoral Principles” on “disagreeing well” in the Church of England.
The appeals tribunal ordered a new employment tribunal to reconsider the case. In the hearing in the Court of Appeal Civil Division last week, Mrs Higgs challenged the decision to order a fresh tribunal.
BBC News reported this week that Mrs Higgs’s lawyer, Richard O’Dair, had asked judges in written submissions to uphold a claim of unlawful discrimination against the school.
In his submission, Mr O’Dair said that there was “overwhelming evidence” that Mrs Higgs had been discriminated against because of her beliefs. He argued that nothing in the posts could be deemed homophobic or transphobic.
Submissions on behalf of the school accepted that “fuller reasons” were required for Mrs Higgs’s dismissal, and agreed with Mrs Justice Eady that the “appropriate course” was for the tribunal process to be rerun.
Mrs Higgs is being supported in her case by the Christian Legal Centre, which is part of the campaigning organisation Christian Concern.
Last week’s hearings took place on Wednesday and Thursday. A judgment is expected in writing in due course.
