Victory for Dingemans and Aughton Ainsworth in ECHR religion case By Joanne Harris 15 January 2013 11:50 17 December 2015 11:22 Sign in or register to continue reading. It's FREE Sign in Email Password Keep me logged in Forgot your password? Not registered? It's FREE! Register now Register with The Lawyer Binda Sahni 16 January 2013 at 08:53 Para. 93 of the judgment highlights the role of concrete evidence to strike a fair balance. Where the freedom to wear the cross and other religious emblems is concerned, these conclusions say it all. “Ms Eweida’s cross was discreet and cannot have detracted from her professional appearance. There was no evidence that the wearing of other, previously authorised, items of religious clothing, such as turbans and hijabs, by other employees, had any negative impact on British Airways’ brand or image. Moreover, the fact that the company was able to amend the uniform code to allow for the visible wearing of religious symbolic jewellery demonstrates that the earlier prohibition was not of crucial importance.” BA has a vastly diverse work force. The judgment applies not only to Ms. Eweida. Reply Link Muhammad Haque 16 January 2013 at 09:04 To quote from the last paragraph of your report: “The ECHR has upheld the principle of equality”. Where is the information in the body of your report about the PRACTICE of that equality as experienced by those who are entitled to the ‘protection’ [term used in your last news report on this topic]’ of that principle but are daily denied that both at the ‘work place’, in the rest of Society and when seeking “professional legal representation”? Reply Link Name Email Cancel reply Threaded commenting powered by interconnect/it code.