The EAT (Lord Fairley) has handed down judgment in University of Bristol v Miller [2026] EAT 84, an appeal from the widely publicised judgment of the Bristol ET which held that Dr Miller’s belief that Zionism is inherently racist, colonial, imperialistic and ought therefore to be opposed was a philosophical belief which qualified for protection under the Equality Act 2010.
The EAT rejected the University’s appeal. It upheld the ET’s judgment that (i) Dr Miller’s anti-Zionist beliefs are philosophical beliefs within the meaning of s.10 of the Equality Act; (ii) that the University directly discriminated against Dr Miller because of his anti-Zionist beliefs when it dismissed him from his role as a Professor following comments which manifested those beliefs, and (iii) that his dismissal was also unfair and in breach of contract.
The judgment is the latest in a series of EAT cases considering the limits of free speech and belief in the workplace. It contains important guidance for employers considering misconduct charges arising out of controversial speech. It can be read here.
Zac Sammour acted for Dr Miller in both the ET and the EAT. In the EAT, he led Giana Seglias of Brick Court. He was instructed by Rahman Lowe.
