header-logo header-logo

Collateral damage

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

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Partner hire bolstersprivate capital and global aviation finance offering

Morae—Carla Mendy

Morae—Carla Mendy

Digital and business solutions firm appoints chief operating officer

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Set welcomes two experienced juniors as new tenants

NEWS
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
back-to-top-scroll