A UNIVERSITY has lost an appeal against an employment tribunal’s finding that it discriminated against an academic on the basis of his anti-Zionist beliefs after he was sacked over comments criticising Israel.
Professor David Miller was dismissed by the University of Bristol in October 2021, after a disciplinary hearing found he “did not meet the standards of behaviour” expected of university staff through comments made in February that year.
The lecturer, who had worked as a professor of political sociology, launched employment tribunal proceedings claiming unfair dismissal, breach of contract and discrimination or victimisation on grounds of religion or belief.
In 2024, a tribunal found that the university discriminated against Prof Miller based on his anti-Zionist beliefs and that he was unfairly and wrongfully dismissed.
It also found that the amount of compensation he should receive – which is yet to be determined – should be halved because of the “contributory fault” of Miller to his own dismissal, based on comments he made about Jewish students and student groups.
The tribunal further found that there was a 30% chance he would have been dismissed lawfully by October 2023 over social posts made in August that year.
The university appealed against the findings, telling the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in November last year that Prof Miller’s anti-Zionist beliefs were political and therefore not protected under the Equality Act.
It also argued that the tribunal wrongly upheld the unfair dismissal claim, and that Prof Miller’s “contributory fault” should have seen his compensation reduced by 100%.
In a ruling on Tuesday, Lord Fairley, the president of the EAT, dismissed most of the university’s appeal, stating that it saw “no good reason why the beliefs relied upon by the claimant in this case should be excluded from protection simply because they related to an issue of social importance which might, broadly, also be categorised as ‘political’”.
Lord Fairley also said that the tribunal’s finding that “the discriminatory decision to dismiss also fell outside the band of reasonable responses” was “a legitimate approach that was properly open to it”.
But the EAT also ruled that it was “not clear” how the employment tribunal concluded that there was a 30% chance that Miller would have been dismissed lawfully in 2023, with this issue sent back to the tribunal for reconsideration.
Miller also appealed against the tribunal’s decision that it was not an act of direct discrimination by the university to find him guilty of misconduct, to dismiss his harassment complaint, and to reduce his compensation, but these were also dismissed by the EAT.
The academic attracted criticism during a lecture at the university in 2019, when he said the Zionist movement was one of five pillars driving Islamophobia in the UK.
The university subsequently received a complaint from the Community Security Trust charity, which said his lecture was a “false, vile … antisemitic slur”, but an investigation found Miller had no case to answer.
Then in February 2021, Miller spoke at an event called Building the Campaign for Free Speech.
The EAT said that during the event, Miller made further comments criticising Zionism and questioned how to make sure Zionism was “ended”.
He also said that it was “fundamental” to Zionism to “encourage Islamophobia and anti-Arab racism”, the EAT said.
Miller was accused of antisemitism online following the speech, and was criticised by the Bristol Jewish Society.
This led him to call some Jewish student groups “political lobby groups”, and describe Jewish students at British universities as “political pawns by a violent, racist foreign regime engaged in ethnic cleansing”.
In a subsequent email to a student journalist, Miller said that Zionism “has no place in any society”, with the comments leading to the disciplinary process that culminated in his dismissal later that year.
Following Tuesday’s judgment, a University of Bristol spokesperson said it was “disappointed” with the EAT’s findings.
They said: “Our core objectives are to ensure all our students thrive at the University of Bristol and to protect freedom of speech and expression, a fundamental part of that care and consideration.
“At the same time, we have an obligation to make sure that these essential and important freedoms are exercised appropriately and in line with our codes of conduct and the expectation of the highest standards of behaviour.
“We will continue to provide an environment where our staff and students can debate difficult and contentious issues, fostering a positive working and learning environment where free speech and academic freedom are championed.”
