Judicial review asserts that fostering agency’s rules against “homosexual behaviour” is direct discrimination

In the case of R (Cornerstone Fostering) v Ofsted, an independent Evangelical Christian fostering agency which places children in need with foster carers, has been found to have breached unlawful direct sexual orientation discrimination legislation to require that people who want join a foster agency as carers refrain from “homosexual behaviour”.

In the case of R (Cornerstone Fostering) v Ofsted, an independent Evangelical Christian fostering agency which places children in need with foster carers, has been found to have breached unlawful direct sexual orientation discrimination legislation to require that people who want join a foster agency as carers refrain from “homosexual behaviour”.

Cornerstone’s rules required any carers registering with them to be Evangelical Christians and “Set a high standard in personal morality which recognises that God’s gift of sexual intercourse is to be enjoyed exclusively within Christian marriage.”  The same rules prohibited “homosexual behaviour”.

However, Ofsted’s findings were that its carer recruitment policy involved unlawful discrimination because of sexual orientation under the Equality Act and the Human Rights Act, and unlawful discrimination. on grounds of religion or belief.

Cornerstone succeeded in a judicial review that they were allowed (under the Equality Act 2010) to restrict membership to Evangelical Christians and said that meant their rules against “homosexual behaviour” were also allowed. Nevertheless, Lord Justice Peter Jackson rejected that argument and held that the rules were directly discriminatory. He said:

“The argument has a certain logic: “We are entitled to discriminate against persons who are not evangelical Christians” therefore “Because homosexuality is unacceptable evangelical Christianity we are entitled to discriminate against homosexuals”. The difficulty with this logic is that it equates religious discrimination with sexual orientation discrimination in all circumstances when that is something that Parliament has not done.”

The Court of Appeal also decided that under the Equality Act 2010, on the evidence, Cornerstone’s actions were not a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. Claims under the Human Rights Act 1998 were also rejected.

Read more

Latest News

Read More

What parenting teaches us about professional growth

15 August 2025

Employee Benefits & Reward

14 August 2025

In the race to attract and retain top talent, HR leaders are constantly reassessing how to create a compelling employee value proposition that aligns with...

Employment Law

14 August 2025

Step-by-step guide for UK employers to prepare for an employment tribunal. Learn ET1/ET3 tips, witness prep, and settlement strategies....

Newsletter

Receive the latest HR news and strategic content

Please note, as per the GDPR Legislation, we need to ensure you are ‘Opted In’ to receive updates from ‘theHRDIRECTOR’. We will NEVER sell, rent, share or give away your data to third parties. We only use it to send information about our products and updates within the HR space To see our Privacy Policy – click here

Latest HR Jobs

University of Cambridge – Department of Clinical NeurosciencesSalary: £33,951 to £39,906 This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal

University of Oxford – HR Centres of Excellence based within the Centre for Human GeneticsSalary: £34,982 to £40,855 per annum (pro rata). Grade 6 This

University of Bradford – Directorate of People and CultureSalary: £40,497 to £45,413 per annum Role 1 – 1 FTE September to end of January 2026.

University of Greater Manchester – Human Resources TeamSalary: £41,671 to £48,149 per annum This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where

Read the latest digital issue of theHRDIRECTOR for FREE

Read the latest digital issue of theHRDIRECTOR for FREE