Christian social worker Felix Ngole returns to Court of Appeal over withdrawn job offer

# What happened

# Legal history so far

An Employment Tribunal ruled that Touchstone directly discriminated when it initially withdrew the offer. The same tribunal, however, accepted Touchstone's decision not to reinstate the offer after the second interview. Ngole challenged that mixed outcome.

Tribunal (EAT) reviewed the tribunal's reasoning and found flaws in how it analysed Touchstone's reasons for the second interview and the decision not to reinstate the offer. The EAT ordered that those parts of the case be reconsidered by the Employment Tribunal.

# Appeal now

Ngole has appealed the EAT's decision to send parts of the case back to the same Employment Tribunal and the same tribunal panel. He argues that after years of litigation the established facts already demonstrate direct discrimination and that another hearing before the same tribunal is unnecessary.

He asks the Court of Appeal for one of two outcomes: a ruling that the facts already amount to direct discrimination, or an order that the reconsideration be carried out by a different Employment Tribunal panel.

# Broader legal question at stake

# Parties and supporters

Ngole is supported by the Christian Legal Centre (CLC). The CLC describes the case as "clear viewpoint discrimination" and warns of wider implications for Christians working in public-facing professions. Andrea Williams, CEO of the CLC, argued that prolonged litigation compounds the injustice and said employers should not be able to interrogate or exclude Christians because someone might take offence at their views.

Ngole has spoken publicly ahead of the hearing. He said he is determined to obtain a clear precedent that Christians should be assessed on conduct and professional ability, not stereotypes about their faith, and that no one should be forced out of a career because their biblical beliefs are known.

# Context and prior related case

# Next steps

London, starting on Monday. The court must decide whether the EAT's order sending parts of the case back to the Employment Tribunal was appropriate, or whether the established facts require a final judicial determination on direct discrimination or a fresh tribunal panel.

# What to watch for at the hearing

• Whether the Court of Appeal accepts Ngole's argument that the established facts show direct discrimination without another tribunal hearing.
• Whether the court orders a fresh tribunal panel instead of returning the matter to the same tribunal.
• Any clarification about employers' ability to vet applicants based on publicly available information about their protected beliefs.