A venue has accepted that it discriminated against a Jewish comedian when it cancelled his show at last year’s Edinburgh Festival Fringe over his views about the Israel-Gaza war.

Philip Simon was due to perform his stand-up show at the Banshee Labyrinth on Niddry Street, but the venue scrapped it at short notice after it carried out “routine” checks on his social media.

It told industry magazine Chortle, external that Simon’s views aligned with “groups associated with humanitarian violations”, but the comic said he had been cancelled “just for being Jewish”.

Simon pursued legal action and on Monday his lawyer David Welsh told a court hearing that the venue had conceded it had acted unlawfully.

He said: “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.”

Simon, from London, had posted a number of remarks on X about the conflict in the Middle East in January 2025.

This included a post where he said Israel had been forced to “capitulate” when it released 1,890 Palestinians – and this amounted to negotiating with “terrorists”.

When the Banshee Labyrinth cancelled his solo show, he said: “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.

“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.”

Simon took legal action against the venue’s owner Morrison Bro’s Ltd, claiming he had been discriminated against on the grounds of “unlawful belief-based discrimination”.

This was agreed between the two parties by joint minute, though the company initially defended the case.

His lawyer claimed the venue had “dragged out proceedings” despite knowing any defence was “untenable” and that it had admitted acting unlawfully “on the eve of the hearing”.

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.

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: “In this case parties have agreed by joint minute that the defender discriminated against the pursuer, contrary to the provisions of the Equalities Act 2010.”

He added that the defender had acted “unreasonably” in leaving it until 5 August to accept it had discriminated against Simon.

He said expenses relating to preparations for a substantive hearing would be awarded at the higher “solicitor-client” rate.