A venue has accepted that it discriminated against a Jewish comedian when it cancelled his show at last year’s Edinburgh Festival Fringe.
Stand-up comic Philip Simon had been due to perform a solo show called Shall I Compere Thee In A Funny Way at the Banshee Labyrinth, on the city’s Niddry Street. However, the venue pulled his act over what it said were his views on the conflict in Palestine.
Venue’s initial justification
In a statement given at the time to industry magazine Chortle, the venue said Mr Simon had expressed views on social media and elsewhere that it said “align with the rhetoric and symbology of groups associated with humanitarian violations”.
Responding to the decision on social media, the performer said he had been cancelled “just for being Jewish”.
“The reason I was given is that my views concerning the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Palestine… are in significant conflict with our venue’s stance against the current Israeli government’s policy and actions,” he said.
Comedian’s response
“Anyone who knows me will know I have never expressed support for anything other than freeing the hostages and finding a way to peace. It is sad to think that these views could conflict with anyone who wants to see a lasting peace in Israel and Gaza.”
He added: “I am still processing the concept that in 2025 I can be cancelled just for being Jewish.”
Mr Simon took legal action against the venue, claiming it had discriminated against him on the grounds of “unlawful belief-based discrimination”.
Legal outcome
This culminated in a hearing at Edinburgh Sheriff Court on Monday, where Mr Simon’s lawyer, David Welsh, said “on the eve of the hearing” the venue accepted it had acted unlawfully.
The lawyer told the court: “The defender conceded that the defender discriminated against the pursuer, contrary to the provisions of the Equalities Act.”
He added: “Following the defence’s concession… the whole issue of liability has now been resolved in the pursuer’s favour. The pursuer has been entirely successful on the question of liability.”
However, he was very critical of the defender’s “conduct” throughout Mr Simon’s legal action, saying it had “dragged out proceedings” despite knowing any defence was “untenable”.
He told the court this led to his client to incur “avoidable expenses at every stage”, and called on the court to award him expenses incurred to date.
“Given that all the expenses to date have been dealt with on the question of liability… I would say that entitles the pursuer to the expenses of the case to date,” he told the court. “There was never a need for the action to reach the court in the first place, if the defender had behaved reasonably.”
Responding, the venue’s lawyer, Darren Cox, disputed whether it would have been possible to settle the matter pre-litigation. He said not all costs incurred to date related to the question of liability, and called for a decision on expenses to be deferred “until the end”.
Judge Sheriff Roderick Flinn said he would retire to consider the question of expenses, and give his decision later on Monday.
