header-logo header-logo

15 October 2010
Issue: 7437 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Human rights

JM v United Kingdom [2010] ECHR 37060/06, [2010] All ER (D) 51 (Oct)

For an issue to arise under Art 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights, there had to be a difference in the treatment of persons in relevantly similar situations, such difference being based on one of the grounds expressly or implicitly covered by that provision.

Such a difference in treatment would be discriminatory if it lacked reasonable and objective justification, that was to say it did not pursue a legitimate aim, or if there was no reasonable relationship of proportionality between the means employed and the aim pursued.

There was a margin of appreciation for states in assessing whether and to what extent differences in otherwise similar situations justified a different treatment, and that margin was usually wide when it came to general measures of economic or social strategy. However, where the complaint was one of discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation, the margin of appreciation would be narrow. The state had to be able to point to particularly convincing and weighty reasons

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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll