header-logo header-logo

12 February 2016 / David Mitchell
Issue: 7686 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Collateral damage

nlj_7686_mitchell

David Mitchell examines the implications of extending associative discrimination in the Chez case

Last July the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Justice (CJEU) handed down judgment in CHEZ Razpredelenie Bulgaria AD v Komisia za zashtita ot diskriminatsia: C-83/14 [2015] All ER (EC) 1083. According to the CJEU, it was possible to construe Art 2(2)(b) of the Race Equality Directive 2000/43/EC which protects against indirect discrimination, as also protecting against “associative” indirect discrimination, thereby extending the principle of associative discrimination established in Coleman v Attridge Law C-303/06 [2008] All ER (EC) 1105. This article will consider the extent to which the concept of associative discrimination set out in Coleman was extended by Chez and what implications this might have for domestic law in the UK.

To recap, in Coleman the CJEU interpreted the EC Framework Employment Directive 2000/78 purposively, in order to permit Ms Coleman to bring claims of disability discrimination against her employer. While Ms Coleman was not herself a disabled person, she was the carer of her disabled son and her complaint concerned her employer’s treatment of her in this capacity. Importantly,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll