Fired Christian school employee had his right to free speech ‘violated’, court told

A Christian school employee had her free speech rights ‘violated’ and faced ‘direct discrimination’ when she was fired for sharing social media posts about teaching LGBT+ relationships, we learned from the Court of Appeal.

Lawyers for Kristie Higgs, 47, claim she lost her job at Farmor’s School in Fairford, Gloucestershire, in 2019 due to ‘unlawful stereotyping’ of her beliefs about ‘gender and sexual ethics’ as “homophobic and transphobic”.

The 47-year-old mother-of-two, from Fairford, who worked as a pastoral administrator and work experiences manager, was sacked after sharing Facebook posts criticizing plans to teach LGBT+ relationships in primary schools.

His lawyers asked top judges on Wednesday to uphold his suit against the school for alleged illegal discrimination, in the latest step in his years-long legal battle.

The school has previously denied firing Ms Higgs because of her religious beliefs and said she was fired because of the language used in the messages.

Before the hearing, his supporters prayed outside the court and held signs with messages saying they had lost their jobs for expressing their views.

Ms Higgs told reporters: “My messages reflect true Christian biblical teaching on gender and sexuality.

She added: “It’s not just about me. It cannot be right that so many Christians lose their jobs or face disciplinary action for sharing biblical truth and our Christian beliefs.

Ms Higgs shared and commented on posts which raised concerns about relationships education at her son’s Church of England primary school.

Pupils were to learn about the No Outsiders In Our School programme, a series of books teaching the Equality Act in primary schools.

Ms Higgs, who posted on a private page under her maiden name, shared two posts in October 2018 with around 100 friends.

One of the messages referred to “brainwashing our children.”

An anonymous complaint was made to the school and Ms Higgs was suspended and, after a disciplinary hearing, dismissed for serious misconduct.

At Wednesday’s hearing in London, his lawyers appealed against a June 2023 judgment by the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT), which found in his favor and referred the case to a court in work for a new decision.

Richard O’Dair, on behalf of Ms Higgs, told the judges in his written arguments that although he had “won” at the EAT, it was “unhelpful” to refer the case back.

Mr O’Dair said the EAT had provided “very unsatisfactory guidance” which meant there was a risk Ms Higgs “would again be denied justice”.

His messages constituted “political speech contributing to the ongoing debate on a matter of public interest” and “a manifestation of his religious beliefs,” the judges said.

Nothing in the messages constituted an expression of homophobia or transphobia in the sense of animosity towards people based on protected characteristics.

There is “overwhelming evidence” that Ms Higgs was “discriminated against because of her beliefs”, Mr O’Dair said, adding that the school’s alleged interference with her rights guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights was “not prescribed by the European Convention on Human Rights”. law”.

“It must follow that (the school) has breached (Ms Higgs’) conventional rights and that her complaint must succeed,” he added.

Mr O’Dair said the person making the complaint was “guilty of unlawful stereotyping and therefore discrimination” and that the school had “adopted the discriminatory views of this third party”.

He added: “Nothing in the messages constitutes an expression of homophobia or transphobia in the sense of animosity towards people based on protected characteristics. Making this assumption was stereotypical and therefore directly discriminatory.

He added that Ms Higgs had worked with LGBT students and “there was never any suggestion that she discriminated against them”.

Protecting the school’s reputation and the rights of others provided “no justification” for his “extremely harsh” dismissal, the court was told, and Mr O’Dair said there had “extremely speculative and nebulous concerns” about how people might misinterpret its messages and perceive the school.

If the school had any concerns about the perceived “flowery and provocative language” of the messages, it could have asked Ms. Higgs to clarify her views in a future message or to be more careful in the future, his lawyer said.

In a 2020 ruling, an employment tribunal found Ms Higgs’ religion was a “protected characteristic” as defined by the Equality Act, but the school legally sacked her.

Sean Jones KC, on behalf of the school, said in written submissions that he accepted that “fuller reasons” were needed from the court and that referring the case was “the appropriate route”.

He said the school accepted the Facebook posts were “manifestations” of Ms Higgs’ beliefs, some of which were legally protected.

“However, these messages could also be interpreted as manifestations of homophobic or transphobic beliefs that could not be protected,” Mr Jones said.

He continued: “(Ms Higgs) was not dismissed for expressing (her beliefs), but because the manner in which they were expressed could reasonably have and did cause others to believe that she expressed homophobic or transphobic opinions. »

Ms Higgs’ case is supported by the Christian Legal Center and the court also allowed intervention from the Association of Christian Teachers, the Free Speech Union, Sex Matters, the Church of England Archbishops’ Council and of the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

The appeal, before Lord Justice Underhill, Lord Justice Bean and Lady Justice Falk, is expected to conclude on Thursday and a written judgment is expected at a later date.