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

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

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
back-to-top-scroll