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

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll