The school refused to allow the student to wear the Kara as part of her uniform. A court said that was discrimination. The Kara, a small and unobtrusive item of jewellery, was of exceptional importance to her identity and race.

Lack of commitment to a political party can be protected if the authorities could torture or kill a person for their lack of belief. A man from Zimbabwe, who feared persecution from the Mugabe regime, was granted asylum.

Teachers and parents argued that based on their Christian belief, they should be able to use corporal punishment - that is, deliberately hurt children. The court decided that corporal punishment at school was not in the children's best interests.

A member of the British National Party was sacked as a driver transporting disabled people. The European Court said his right to free expression and free association were breached. The law was changed to make it easier for employees to claim unfair dismissal if they were disadvantaged because of their politics.

A Jehovah's witness was convicted for refusing to serve in the Amenian army. He successfully argued his right to conscientious objection based on his deeply held religious beliefs. He was awarded 20,000 euros in compensation.

Four Christians, a reigstrar, air hostess, nurse and counsellor, said that their right to practise their religion at work was violated. The BA employee successfully argued that stopping her wearing a visible Christian cross violated her human rights. The others failed.

A teacher said he was forced to resign from his job because the school wouldn't let him attend Friday prayers at a mosque during working hours. There was no violation of his right to freedom of religion, as he was bound by his contractual obligations.

Muslim employees were refused time off during the holiday of Eid even though they offered to work extra hours to make up for it. The court said they were discriminated against because of their religion.

A school refused to allow a student to wear a jilbab at school. The school successfully argued that in the circumstances, the restriction was lawful, and therefore did not breach the student's right to demonstrate her religious belief or stop her accessing education.