A rapist who murdered a couple and their son has become the first person in Britain to appeal over a 'life means life' sentence.
Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke insists that Britain has steered through real reforms to the European Court of Human Rights.
The row over Abu Qatada is set to be reignited as Britain tries to secure a deal that could see European human rights judges intervene less.
– British Airways
The European Court of Human Rights has upheld a claim against the UK Government for a failure to protect European Convention rights.
British Airways was not a party to this legal action. It was pursued against the UK government.
Our own uniform policy was changed in 2007 to allow Miss Eweida and others to wear symbols of faith and she and other employees have been working under these arrangements for the last six years.
Miss Eweida has worked continuously for British Airways for 13 years.
– Dave Landrum, director of advocacy for the Evangelical Alliance
The court's recognition of Christian belief in everyday life is welcome, but in only finding in favour of Nadia Eweida, it has shown a hierarchy of rights now exists in UK law.
The failure of the court to protect the religious freedom of Lillian Ladele in living out her faith in a way consistent with historic Christian belief shows the limitations of this judgment.
Former Relate counsellor Gary McFarlane, who was sacked after refusing to give sex therapy to same-sex couples, said the judgment by the European Court of Human Rights against him was "regrettable".
Speaking in central London, he said he would appeal the decision while continuing to counsel same-sex couples in other aspects of their lives.
The ECHR's ruling found against Mr McFarlane on the grounds that he took on the role at Relate in the knowledge that clients could not be divided up in accordance with their sexual orientation.
It concluded the company's action was designed to enable it to provide a service without discrimination.
– British Airways check-in clerk Nadia Eweida
I was very selfish initially when I heard the verdict because I was jumping for joy and saying 'thank you Jesus'. It's a vindication that Christians have a right to express their faith on par with other colleagues at work visibly and not be ashamed of their faith.
I'm disappointed on behalf of the other three applicants but I fully support them in their asking for a referral for their cases to be heard in the Grand Chamber, and I wish them every success in the future to win.
Barrister Adam Wagner, who specialises in human rights, has confirmed the timeline for the three Christians who lost their cases at the European Court of Human Rights to appeal to the Strasbourg court's higher chamber.
The unsuccessful European Court of Human rights applicants have three months to mount an appeal to the court's Grand Chamber
Delighted that principle of wearing religious symbols at work has been upheld – ppl shouldn't suffer discrimination due to religious beliefs
While cross-wearing BA employee Nadia Eweida enjoyed victory at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), three other Christians lost their cases, including hospital nurse Shirley Chaplin, who had been prevented from wearing a cross visibly around her neck.
They will be appealing today's judgment at the ECHR's Grand Chamber.
Speaking at a news conference in central London, Ms Chaplin said she was "very disappointed" by the judgment but heartened that other Christians can now wear a cross in the workplace.
She said she still feels that other religions are given more freedom in the workplace and called upon David Cameron to live up to a promise to change the law to protect cross-wearers.
The European Court of Human Rights has deemed a fair balance was not struck between British Airways check-in clerk Nadia Eweida's desire to demonstrate her religious belief with a "discreet" cross and the airline's wish to "project a certain corporate image".
The judgment, published in Strasbourg, found the airline's aim was "undoubtedly legitimate" but said British courts had accorded it "too much weight" in previous rulings.
– Shami Chakrabarti, director of human rights group Liberty
Today's judgment is an excellent result for equal treatment, religious freedom and common sense. Nadia Eweida wasn't hurting anyone and was perfectly capable of doing her job whilst wearing a small cross. She had just as much a right to express her faith as a Sikh man in a turban or a Muslim woman with a headscarf.
British courts lost their way in her case and Strasbourg has actually acted more in keeping with our traditions of tolerance. However the Court was also right to uphold judgments in other cases that employers can expect staff not to discriminate in the discharge of duties at work.
Barrister Adam Wagner, who specialises in human rights, has tweeted that today's judgment by the European Court of Human Rights could benefit religious believers in the workplace:
Will European judgment help religious believers at work? Probably. Employers will be more careful in certain circumstances. But limited win.
One way European judgment likely to help religious believers is they no longer have to prove their belief was mandated by their religion