The tribunal of a primary school teacher who was sacked for “misgendering” a child collapsed after slurs against Christians and people with socially conservative views made by one of the judges emerged. The entire panel of the Nottinghamshire employment tribunal stepped down on the sixth day of the unfair dismissal hearing brought by the female teacher, who has only been named as “Hannah” in order to protect the identity of the child. Hannah, who is a Christian, was fired from her
Job after she refused to “affirm” the identity of an 8-year-old girl who said she was a boy and wanted to be addressed with male pronouns and to use the boys’ toilets and changing rooms. Employment Judge Victoria Butler, a second lay member of the panel, Javed Akhtar, and Mr. Purkis all recused themselves in response to revelations of a
Social Media post by Mr. Purkis that was said to advocate for religious discrimination. Mr. Purkis, who describes himself as lifelong socialist and trade unionist, appeared to advocate for discrimination against Christians when he replied to a comment on social media that only atheists should be allowed in public office, “Damn right, you won’t catch us killing in the name of our non-god.” In reply to another comment from a social media user that they found Christians to be “worse than woke,” Mr. Purkis said: “If they are so [expletive] super how comes there is so much [expletive] going on in the world,” and added, “I need no higher power to tell me the right way to treat people and behave.” Posting in response to Professor Mark Barber saying the “woke bullying” of former Conservative MP, Lee Anderson, by the “Marxist
BBC must stop,” Mr. Purkis said, “If you lead with your chin, expect to get hit.” He had “liked” a post that suggested there was no such thing as “the opposite of woke because there is no definition of ‘woke’. It’s just a fresh dollop of ethereal stupidity, invented to provide a new bogeyman for the bewildered…now the equally ethereal
Brexit has turned into something tangible…and that tangible thing is [expletive].” In his previously open but now closed social media profile, Mr. Purkis also liked a post picturing former Home Secretary Suella Braverman which said, “nowhere on God’s green earth would you find a politician as evil, stupid and repulsive as this [expletive] ghoul.” After the discovery of Mr. Purkis’s comments, the teacher’s lawyer, Pavel Stroilov, made an application for the the panel to recuse itself, claiming there was “a possibility of bias.” He said that in the social media exchange, 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 could be perceived to have been influenced by his view of the case. The tribunal agreed, acknowledging that “doubt would arise in the mind of a fair-minded and informed observer” regarding their impartiality. At her employment tribunal, it emerged that a transgender activist, Edward Lord, who was associated with the charities Mermaids and Stonewall, was sitting on the case. The unnamed teacher said through her legal representatives at Christian Concern: “It means a further delay to me receiving justice, but I have to have a fair trial. I am shocked that this is not the first time this has happened.” The guidance given last December adds that teachers should not be compelled to go against their conscience and use a pupil’s preferred pronouns which are contrary to their biological sex, and states that allowing a child to “transition” is not a “neutral act.” “While we are pleased to have exposed this, justice delayed is justice denied, not just for Hannah but for ignorant children.” “Hannah’s story exposes the confusion and untruths being embedded in primary schools over human sexuality and identity which are developing into a public health crisis.” Mr. Purkis was previously a member of the panel who found against the Rev. Bernard Randall in September 2022 in a judgment that is now being appealed after Mr. Randall’s barristers argued that the judges exhibited bias. Commenting on the link between the presiding panel and the case of Mr. Randall, Judge Butler said she was “not persuaded that Randall had any bearing on this tribunal, however we are aware that [the teacher] may not have confidence.” The hearing is expected to begin afresh before a different panel later this year.