Discrimination

Where discrimination was direct (where a rule, practice or policy prescribed different treatment for persons in like situations) it was the rule itself that had  to be justified: the difference in treatment. Where the discrimination was indirect (where a single rule had disparate impact on one group as opposed to another) it was the disparate impact that had to be justified. With Thlimmenos v Greece (App No 34369/97) discrimination, what had to be justified was the failure to make a different rule for those adversely affected. Indirect and Thlimmenos discrimination were closely allied applications of the principle that like cases should be treated alike and that different cases should be treated differently. Indirect discrimination often involved an assertion that the claimants should be treated differently from others who were covered by the rule complained of, which was Thlimmenos discrimination.