Full Breakdown
Tribunal Rules University of Bristol Discriminated Against Professor Over Anti-Zionist Views
8/5/2026, 4:34:41 PM
Tribunal Finds Discrimination in Dismissal of Professor
In a 2024 ruling, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) concluded that the University of Bristol unlawfully dismissed political sociology lecturer Prof David Miller on the basis of his anti-Zionist beliefs. The tribunal held that the university’s actions amounted to discrimination under the Equality Act and that Miller’s dismissal was both wrongful and unfair. While the tribunal affirmed the finding of discrimination, it reduced the compensation award, citing Miller’s own “contributory fault” for remarks he made about Jewish students and groups.
Background of the Dismissal
Miller was terminated in October 2021 after the university cited a breach of its standards of behaviour. The decision followed a 2019 lecture that attracted criticism for an alleged antisemitic slur, as well as comments made at a 2021 Campaign for Free Speech event and an email to a student journalist in which he described Zionism as having “no place in any society” and labeled Jewish student organisations as “political lobby groups” and “political pawns.” These statements prompted criticism from the Bristol Jewish Society and led to disciplinary proceedings.
Tribunal Reasoning and Outcome
Lord Fairley, president of the tribunal, rejected the university’s argument that anti-Zionist beliefs were purely political and therefore unprotected, emphasizing that the law does not exclude such beliefs from protection merely because they relate to a socially important issue. The EAT dismissed the university’s appeal against most of the tribunal’s findings, including the discrimination claim and the decision that Miller’s misconduct finding was not direct discrimination. The compensation amount remains to be determined, with the tribunal noting it should be halved due to Miller’s contributory fault.
University Response
A university spokesperson expressed disappointment with the tribunal’s findings but reiterated the institution’s commitment to safeguarding free speech while ensuring conduct aligns with its codes of behaviour. The university affirmed its intention to maintain an environment that supports debate on contentious topics and upholds academic freedom.
Implications for Academic Freedom
The case highlights the tension between protecting free expression and enforcing conduct standards within UK higher education. Legal experts note that the ruling may set a precedent for how anti-Zionist speech is treated under discrimination law, potentially influencing future university disciplinary processes and the scope of protected belief.
