Get in Touch Menu

Volunteers are not protected against discrimination

10 July 2013

Businesses are now protected from potential discrimination claims made by volunteers. In the case of X v Mid-Sussex Citizens Advice Bureau, the Supreme Court has ruled that an unpaid volunteer without any binding contract is not protected against discrimination either under UK or EU law.

X was a volunteer who had signed a volunteer agreement with the CAB in May 2006.The agreement was phrased as being “binding in honour only…and not a contract of employment or legally binding”. X was asked to step down as a volunteer. She filed a disability discrimination claim against the CAB, on the grounds that she had been dismissed for being HIV-positive (which is designated in legislation as being a disability, for anti-discrimination purposes).

X was not protected under the Disability Discrimination Act (now replaced by the Equality Act in largely similar terms) because she did not have a binding contract. She argued she was protected under the EU Framework Employment Equality Directive, which refers to conditions “for access to employment, to self-employment or to occupation”. It was held that being a volunteer did not amount to any of these things. The concept of a volunteer having “access to occupation” under the directive was dismissed on the grounds that this provision contemplates access to a sector of the market, rather than a specific post. The court placed reliance on the fact that an amendment to specifically include voluntary work had been rejected during the directive’s legislative process.

The decision will be of comfort to charities, which will now not be vulnerable to discrimination claims from volunteers, provided they are not working under a binding contract. However, there have been cases where volunteers have been found to have binding contracts, and to have acquired certain legal rights as a result. It is, therefore, important that volunteer relationships are properly documented and that the legal status of the relationship is made clear. If the relationship is to avoid being viewed as legally binding, it should be expressed in terms of “expectations” on each side, rather than “obligations” or “commitments”.

Contact us for clear advice.

Disclaimer: All legal information is correct at the time of publication but please be aware that laws may change over time. This article contains general legal information but should not be relied upon as legal advice. Please seek professional legal advice about your specific situation - contact us; we’d be delighted to help.
Charlotte Cowdell BA (Hons), LLB
Associate, solicitor
View profile
Charlotte Brundson
Share this article
Resources to help

Related articles

Reintroducing rolled up holiday pay: The practical steps you & your business can take

Employment & business immigration

In November, the government published the draft Employment Rights (Amendment, Revocation and Transitional Provision) Regulations 2023 (the draft regulations), and are due to come into force on 1 January 2024.…

Hayley Ainsworth BA, MSc
Associate, solicitor

Unearthing the implicit duty of cooperation in commercial contracts


In the world of business, contracts are the bedrock upon which deals are built. These carefully crafted documents are a testament to the mutual understanding between parties, outlining their respective…

Richard Holland BA (Hons)
Associate, solicitor

Autumn statement: Key financial changes for workers

Employment & business immigration

The government today outlined some key financial changes for workers in 2024 as part of this year’s autumn statement. National insurance Firstly, the 12% rate of employee national insurance contributions…

Hayley Ainsworth BA, MSc
Associate, solicitor
Contact us