In the last 12 months the BBC has played an unexpected role, featuring heavily in the development of discrimination law in the UK.

Most notably in a recent case which could have wider implications for lawyers too.

Devan Maistry was an employee with BBC Asian Network for six years before he alleges he was wrongfully dismissed and discriminated against on the grounds of his belief.

Mr Maistry was relying on the protection now set out in the Equality Act 2010 which is designed to prevent discrimination on the grounds of his belief.

So what was his belief?

Mr Maistry informed the Employment Tribunal Judge that he held a philosophical view that a 'public service broadcasting has the higher purpose of promoting cultural interchange and social cohesion', which he believed was a belief in accordance with the legislation.

The Employment Tribunal judge concluded that Mr Maistry 'had a genuine and strongly held belief in what I will describe in short as the higher purpose of public service broadcasting. It is clearly of great personal significance to him'.

Consequently, Mr Maistry’s views amounted to a philosophical belief.

Mr Maistry still has to go through the process of explaining to an Employment Tribunal panel why he believes his treatment amounted to unlawful discrimination.

However, the decision by Employment Judge Hughes that a belief in public sector broadcasting could be a belief for the purposes of the Equality Act has significant implications and potentially open the floodgates to many more claims.

This does not come as a huge surprise given the way the legislation is drafted and the leeway afforded to employment judges and/or panels to make determinations on what is a belief for the purpose of the legislation.

This decision follows another key development in this area of law where Tim Nicholson, a firm believer in climate change was successful in his claim that he had been discriminated against by his employer, Grainger Thist plc.

In Mr Nicholson’s case, however, he had to demonstrate he lived by those beliefs.

Are there any direct implications for the legal profession following this decision?

I believe there could be.

Mr Maistry told the Employment Tribunal that he had been a student leader, a trade unionist and journalist in South Africa during the anti-apartheid struggle but was forced to flee the country after his reporting led to raids on The Press Trust of South Africa News Agency.

It was this experience that led to his belief that journalism is an essential component of democracy and that a public television service is essential to provide an effective space for enhancing citizenship.

Could lawyers have similar views on the law and the purpose of the judicial system in England and Wales?

I think there is every possibility that there will be lawyers who entered the profession as a result of holding a genuine belief in the 'higher purpose' of the law or a strong belief in the judicial system as it operates in England and Wales.

Of course the onus remains on the first test case lawyer who does try to rely on the legislation to show this is a 'genuine and strongly held' belief.

Ultimately of course, one would hope that a lawyer is never put in a position where their belief in the law becomes subjected to scrutiny by an employment judge.

Pam Loch of niche employment law practice, Loch Associates Employment Lawyers