<p><strong>2015/41 No discrimination where Muslim candidate was told not to wear a jilbab that could pose a risk to health and safety (UK)</strong></p>

In a case involving a claim for indirect discrimination on grounds of religion or belief, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) agreed that an employer’s uniform policy, which required that no garment worn by an employee should present a tripping hazard, did not indirectly discriminate against Muslim women who wore jilbabs (long, flowing garments which cover the body).

ECJ 13 November 2014, case C-416/13 (Mario Vital Pérez – v– Ayuntamíento di Oviedo), Age discrimination

The municipality of Oviedo published a “notice of competition” intended to fill local...

ECJ 13 November 2014, case&nbsp;C-416/13&nbsp;(Mario Vital P&eacute;rez &ndash; v&ndash; Ayuntam&iacute;ento di Oviedo), Age discrimination

The municipality of Oviedo published a “notice of competition” intended to fill local...

ECJ 11 November 2014, case C-530/13 (Leopold Schmitzer – v – Bundesministerin für Inneres), Age discrimination

Mr Schmitzer was under 18 when he was employed as a civil servant. Under the Austrian law as it...

ECJ 11 November 2014, case&nbsp;C-530/13&nbsp;(Leopold Schmitzer &ndash; v &ndash; Bundesministerin f&uuml;r Inneres), Age discrimination

Mr Schmitzer was under 18 when he was employed as a civil servant. Under the Austrian law as it...

2015/7 Equal treatment at the hairdresser? (DK)

In Denmark, it is prohibited to discriminate on grounds of gender both within the labour market and in the wider world. Consequently, the freedom of contract of both vendors and suppliers is limited by the fact that they must not discriminate on the basis of gender when selling products, supplying services and entering into contracts. This principle is set out in s2 of the Danish Gender Equality Act, which is based on the Directive on equal treatment of men and women outside the labour market (Directive 2004/113/EC).

If a person feels discriminated against on grounds of gender, he or she may file a complaint to the Danish Board of Equal Treatment. If the Board finds that the defendant has breached the Danish Gender Equality Act it can award compensation to the complainant. If the defendant disagrees with the decision of the Board and decides not to comply with its ruling, the Board can bring an action against the defendant in the civil courts. The defendant also has the opportunity to take legal action against the Board.

2015/7 Equal treatment at the hairdresser? (DK)

In Denmark, it is prohibited to discriminate on grounds of gender both within the labour market and in the wider world. Consequently, the freedom of contract of both vendors and suppliers is limited by the fact that they must not discriminate on the basis of gender when selling products, supplying services and entering into contracts. This principle is set out in s2 of the Danish Gender Equality Act, which is based on the Directive on equal treatment of men and women outside the labour market (Directive 2004/113/EC).

If a person feels discriminated against on grounds of gender, he or she may file a complaint to the Danish Board of Equal Treatment. If the Board finds that the defendant has breached the Danish Gender Equality Act it can award compensation to the complainant. If the defendant disagrees with the decision of the Board and decides not to comply with its ruling, the Board can bring an action against the defendant in the civil courts. The defendant also has the opportunity to take legal action against the Board.

2015/8 No obligation on employer to set aside a disabled employee’s final warning for sickness absence (UK)

In a case involving recurrent sickness absence that was unlikely to improve, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (‘EAT’) has overturned findings of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination based on failure to make reasonable adjustments.

2015/8 No obligation on employer to set aside a disabled employee&rsquo;s final warning for sickness absence (UK)

In a case involving recurrent sickness absence that was unlikely to improve, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (‘EAT’) has overturned findings of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination based on failure to make reasonable adjustments.

2015/24 Protestant hospital may ban headscarf at work (GE)

It is permissible for an employer who is part of a religious community, in this case the Protestant Church, to ask its employees to behave neutrally during working hours. This duty of neutrality can justify a prohibition on wearing Islamic headscarves.