Insight

Religious Symbols in the Workplace: Recent Decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union

Is it discrimination for a workplace to ban employees from display political, philosophical, and religious symbols in the work environment?

Blue background with lots of religious symbols and the CJEU stars make a ring
Pascale Lagesse

Pascale Lagesse

May 11, 2017 10:04 AM

After months of debate in France, Belgium, and more generally in Europe, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued on March 14, 2017, two landmark decisions regarding religious symbols in the workplace.

After reviewing two cases (one French and the other Belgian), the CJEU held that, under certain conditions, displaying one’s religious or philosophical beliefs in the workplace can now be governed by a company’s internal rules and regulations.

In the Belgian case, the CJEU was asked to review whether a provision in the company’s rules and regulations that prevented employees from visibly displaying their political, philosophical, or religious beliefs at work constituted direct discrimination. The Court ruled that it did not, since the ban was general and did not differentiate between employees.

However, they noted that this type of provision may constitute indirect discrimination. In order to avoid running this risk, the Court has offered the following guidance, which is consistent with its traditional way of reasoning. First, the provision must be justified by a legitimate aim: the company’s “policy of neutrality” regarding its customers qualified as such. Second, the provision must be appropriate and necessary. In other words, it must enable the above objective to be achieved. The provision is deemed to be appropriate if it is a general ban on displaying political, philosophical, or religious symbols, to the extent that the policy of neutrality is carried out in a consistent and systematic fashion. The provision is deemed to be necessary if it is limited to employees who are in contact with customers and if the employer cannot offer the employees other positions that do not involve interactions with clients.

In the French case, the CJEU held that, apart from a policy of neutrality that is pursued under the conditions described above, an employer cannot take into account the wishes of a client who no longer wants the employer’s services to be provided by a woman wearing a headscarf.

While these two decisions have provided some guidance on this topic, some questions do remain. Should an employer prevent employees from displaying all of their beliefs in the workplace (religious, political, and philosophical) or just their religious beliefs? The question is a delicate one. A provision of a company’s rules and regulations that is too broad would be contrary to Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which applies in the European Union (right to freedom of thought,conscience, and religion), while a restriction that is limited solely to religion could constitute direct discrimination.

Another question that arises is whether a policy of neutrality can be adopted in documents other than internal rules and regulations. Provided that the conditions of validity established by the European Court of Justice are satisfied, can an employer institute such a policy via other means as part of his managerial authority, for example in the employees’ contracts or otherwise? Some companies in France, for example, have allowed their employees to vote on whether they would like to have a “charter for secularity in the workplace” implemented at their company in order to address these issues.

---------------

Pascale Lagesse is a partner at Bredin Prat and heads the firm’s employment law practice. She specializes in the labor and employment issues arising out of mergers and acquisitions and corporate downsizings and restructurings. Pascale is active in a variety of organizations and is a member of the Best Lawyers Advisory Board, co-chair of the International Bar Association (IBA) Global Employment Institute, and a member of the IBA LPD Council. Find out more at https://www.bredinprat.fr/en/partner?origin=partners&id=121.

Trending Articles

2026 Best Lawyers Awards: Recognizing Legal Talent Across the United States


by Jamilla Tabbara

The 2026 editions highlight the top 5% of U.S. attorneys, showcase emerging practice areas and reveal trends shaping the nation’s legal profession.

Map of the United States represented in The Best Lawyers in America 2026 awards

Gun Rights for Convicted Felons? The DOJ Says It's Time.


by Bryan Driscoll

It's more than an administrative reopening of a long-dormant issue; it's a test of how the law reconciles the right to bear arms with protecting the public.

Firearms application behind jail bars

2026 Best Lawyers Awards in Canada: Marking 20 Years of Excellence


by Jamilla Tabbara

Honoring Canada’s most respected lawyers and spotlighting the next generation shaping the future of law.

Shining Canadian map marking the 2026 Best Lawyers awards coverage

Revealing the 2026 Best Lawyers Awards in Germany, France, Switzerland and Austria


by Jamilla Tabbara

These honors underscore the reach of the Best Lawyers network and its focus on top legal talent.

map of Germany, France, Switzerland and Austria

Best Lawyers 2026: Discover the Honorees in Brazil, Mexico, Portugal, South Africa and Spain


by Jamilla Tabbara

A growing international network of recognized legal professionals.

Map highlighting the 2026 Best Lawyers honorees across Brazil, Mexico, Portugal, South Africa and Sp

How to Sue for Defamation: Costs, Process and What to Expect


by Bryan Driscoll

Learn the legal standards, costs and steps involved when you sue for defamation, including the difference between libel and slander.

Group of people holding papers with speech bubbles above them

Build Your Legal Practice with Effective Online Networking


by Jamilla Tabbara

How thoughtful online networking supports sustained legal practice growth.

Abstract web of connected figures symbolizing online networking among legal professionals

Algorithmic Exclusion


by Bryan Driscoll

The Workday lawsuit and the future of AI in hiring.

Workday Lawsuit and the Future of AI in Hiring headline

Blogging for Law Firms: Turning Content into Client Connections


by Jamilla Tabbara

How law firms use blogs to earn trust and win clients.

Lawyer typing blog content on laptop in office

Reddit’s Lawsuit Could Change How Much AI Knows About You


by Justin Smulison

Big AI is battling for its future—your data’s at stake.

Reddit Anthropic Lawsuit headline

How to Choose a Good Lawyer: Tips, Traits and Questions to Ask


by Laurie Villanueva

A Practical Guide for Your First-Time Hiring a Lawyer

Three professional lawyers walking together and discussing work

The 2026 Best Lawyers Awards in Chile, Colombia and Puerto Rico


by Jamilla Tabbara

The region’s most highly regarded lawyers.

Map highlighting Chile, Colombia and Puerto Rico for the 2026 Best Lawyers Awards

Common-Law Marriage in Indiana: Are You Legally Protected?


by Laurie Villanueva

Understanding cohabitation rights and common-law marriage recognition in Indiana.

Married Indiana couple in their home

Why Jack Dorsey and Elon Musk Want to 'Delete All IP Law'


by Bryan Driscoll

This Isn’t Just a Debate Over How to Pay Creators. It’s a Direct Challenge to Legal Infrastructure.

Elon Musk and Jack Dorsey standing together Infront of the X logo

AI Tools for Lawyers: How Smithy AI Solves Key Challenges


by Jamilla Tabbara

Understand the features and benefits within the Best Lawyers Digital Marketing Platform.

Legal professional editing profile content with Smithy AI

Alimony Explained: Who Qualifies, How It Works and What to Expect


by Bryan Driscoll

A practical guide to understanding alimony, from eligibility to enforcement, for anyone navigating divorce

two figures standing on stacks of coins