Anti-christian comments collapse teacher’s tribunal

A TRIBUNAL hearing for a teacher who says she was wrongly sacked for “misgendering” a pupil has collapsed after a member was accused of making anti-christian comments and posting Tory slurs on social media.

All three members of the tribunal in Nottingham, including the judge, have recused themselves to avoid a “perception of bias” against the teacher, who refused to use an eight-year-old’s preferred pronouns.

The teacher claimed she repeatedly raised concerns about the girl’s wellbeing after teachers were told always to refer to her with male pronouns and to allow her to use the boys’ toilets and dressing rooms. The teacher, who cannot be named to protect the anonymity of the child, was told that her Christian beliefs, if acted upon, could be an act of “direct discrimination”. She is suing Nottinghamshire county council and one of its primary schools for unfair dismissal and religious discrimination.

The decision of all the tribunal members to recuse themselves comes after social media posts that were alleged to “advocate religious discrimination” came to light. Jed Purkis, a non-legal member of the tribunal hearing, responding to a comment that only atheists should be in public office, said: “Damn right, you won’t catch us killing in the name of our non-god.” In another social media post, which has now been made private, he responded to the question, “What’s a good collective noun for Tories?” by suggesting a “tumour of Tories” and a “cesspit of Tories”.

After the discovery of Mr Purkis’s comments, Pavel Stroilov, the teacher’s lawyer, made an application for refusal, alleging there was “a possibility of bias”. He said Mr Purkis appeared “to agree with a view, which expressly advocates for religious discrimination in public life”. He argued that it would not be sufficient for only Mr Purkis to step down, since the other two judges had presided over the trial together over six days and would be perceived as influenced by his view of the case.

Responding to the recusal, the teacher said: “It means a further delay to me receiving justice, but I have to have a fair trial.”

A spokesman for the judicial office said: “We would never comment on a decision made in a specific case.”