Christian Social Worker Appeals To Court Of Appeal After Job Offer Withdrawn Over Online Religious Comments

Felix Ngole, a 48-year-old social worker, is returning to the Court of Appeal after a Wakefield-based charity withdrew a conditional job offer when it discovered historic online comments he made about marriage and sexuality.

Ngole was initially offered a role as a mental health support worker with Touchstone in 2022, but the offer was rescinded about a month later after the charity found news coverage of a landmark 2019 legal victory he won against Sheffield University. That earlier dispute began when Sheffield University removed him from a social-work course and declared him unfit to practise following comments he made during a Facebook debate, in which he said "the Bible and God identify homosexuality as a sin." The court later ruled the university's actions unlawfully restricted his freedom of expression; he was reinstated and subsequently qualified as a social worker.

Touchstone withdrew the conditional job offer after finding the historic comments, then invited Mr Ngole to a second interview that focused specifically on his beliefs. After that interview the charity declined to reinstate the offer.

Tribunal History and Current Appeal

Mr Ngole brought the matter to an employment tribunal. The tribunal found he had been discriminated against because of his beliefs, but also concluded Touchstone was entitled to conduct a second interview and to decide not to confirm the appointment.

Mr Ngole with his legal team and supporters outside the High Court in 2017 - Champion News/Richard Gittins

In February an employment appeal tribunal held that the university's original action had discriminated against his beliefs but did not finally determine that unlawful discrimination had been established in relation to the Touchstone decision; it instead sent aspects of the case back to the original tribunal for reconsideration.

Mr Ngole is now asking the Court of Appeal to rule on two key points: first, that the facts already established demonstrate direct discrimination and therefore no repeat hearing is necessary; and second, that if the dispute must be reconsidered, it should not be returned to the same tribunal whose reasoning was found to be legally flawed.

Arguments And Wider Implications

Mr Ngole and his legal team, supported by the Christian Legal Centre, argue the appeal tribunal's order risks a chilling effect: employers could be encouraged to trawl applicants' online histories for expressions of belief, subject people with legally protected convictions to extra questioning, or refuse them work on the basis that others might take offence.

"I'm not doing this because it's an easy thing to do. Pursuing these cases is difficult and something I suffer from — I may not even be able to work, depending on the result — but I feel it is important to pursue justice, and that justice is worth pursuing," Mr Ngole said.

Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, said: "It is untenable for Christians to be told their beliefs are protected in theory while employers remain free to interrogate, exclude or penalise them because someone might discover those beliefs and take offence. Allowing this would impose an unofficial religious test for entry into public-facing professions."

The case is notable for the possibility that it could be the first time an individual has pursued two separate Court of Appeal challenges over workplace penalties arising from the public expression of Christian beliefs. Touchstone was contacted for comment.