It's a disappointing read since it's very light on legal analysis; the report is aimed at those who might be excited by the gambit of, 'you'll never believe this but ...'
One of the cases chosen to examine is Grainger v Nicholson,
"Tim Nicholson, the former head of sustainability at a property firm called Grainger plc, won the right to sue his employer on the basis that he was unfairly dismissed for his green views after a judge ruled that environmentalism had the same weight in law as religious and philosophical beliefs.
Mr Justice Michael Burton concluded that "a belief in man-made climate change ... is capable, if genuinely held, of being a philosophical belief for the purpose of the 2003 Religion and Belief Regulations"."
I also disagreed with this finding. For my discussion see, here.
However, as yet, I haven't found any other criticism, with legal discussion, of the ruling. (Apart, of course, from this, from the Employmentlaw Advocate blog).