Gilbert v Mayne Nickless (UK) Ltd (t/a Parceline) [1996] UKEAT 722_96_1812

EAT
Gilbert v Mayne Nickless (UK) Ltd (t/a Parceline)
[1996] UKEAT 722_96_1812 · 1996-12-18

JUDGE LEVY QC :

Mr Stephen John Gilbert made an application to an Industrial Tribunal dated 17th February 1996, stating in box one of his application "race bias". On a separate sheet he made a statement which reads as follows:
"August 1995 a photocopy of a cartoon had been pinned (anonymously) to the depot warehouse notice board. it depicted Moses looking into a mirror and parting his hair merely by outstretching his arms, (a reference to his parting of the Red Sea). A hand written caption read:
'Another day in the Gilbert house-hold (Charlton Heston).'
The catoon [ cartoon ] remained in place for a period of about three weeks, with no action or comment from the management. In addition, I have been the butt of 'burning bush' jokes from members of the workforce.While most people may derive some amusement from all of this. It none the less has weighed heavy on my mind as I am Jewish by faith. It is particularly troubling for me, as some months previous, I had experienced the humiliating termination of a job interview because (and stated at the time) '- the company do not employ people with beards'. I feel it worthwhile to mention here that I regard my beard as not just a symbol of manhood but equally important, a symbol of my faith.In support of my application I cite the case of Thomas vs. The Metropolitan Police, where the tribunal judged 'We accept that for many years at Chiswick the applicant was known as hymie and there was an understanding that now and again colleagues were entitled to make what was perceived as a playful dig at his jewishness.'"The Notice of Appearance by his employer said that Mr Gilbert had been dismissed in accordance with the Company Disciplinary Procedure for other reasons. In the course of the hearings, Mr Gilbert raised matters on the lines of the statements in his Originating Application.There was a hearing before an Industrial Tribunal sitting at Southampton on 20th June 1996. Mr Gilbert's application under the Race Relations Act 1976 failed and was dismissed. The extended reasons were sent to the parties shortly after on 27th June 1996. By Notice of Appeal dated 1st July 1996, Mr Gilbert appealed against that decision. In his Notice of Appeal he makes reference to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and his skeleton argument he encloses an article on "Condemned for Conversion".The extended reasons of the Industrial Tribunal set out quite clearly and correctly that Mr Gilbert was not a Jew, and in those circumstances, unlike the authority which he mentioned in his application, he was not personally the subject of racial prejudice. Mr Gilbert has asserted to us, as he asserted to the Industrial Tribunal, that faith is something within him, not something for others to recognise. In the decision of the Industrial Tribunal reference is made to the decision in Mandla v Dowell Lee [1983] ICR 385 where Lord Fraser set out the definition of an ethnic group. The extended reasons go on to explain fully why Mr Gilbert had no place to make an application, he not being a Jew in any proper sense of the word.In the circumstances, we see no merit at all in this appeal, it is bound to fail, and accordingly we dismiss it at this stage.