Intersectional discrimination and EU law: Time to revisit Parris

IF 1.2 Q1 LAW
Erica Howard
{"title":"Intersectional discrimination and EU law: Time to revisit Parris","authors":"Erica Howard","doi":"10.1177/13582291241285336","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article it is argued that the CJEU judgment in Parris needs to be revisited to recognise that intersectional discrimination is covered by the EU anti-discrimination Directives. There are several reasons for this. First, a prohibition of intersectional discrimination is now laid down in an EU anti-discrimination Directive (Directive, 2023/970/EC); second, this would fit in with developments in the EU Commission, Council and Parliament; third Parris turns on its own facts; fourth a purposive or capacious interpretation of these Directives already allows for such discrimination to be included in the Directives; fifth, the shift in CJEU case law towards a intra-group comparison for discrimination can make comparisons in intersectional discrimination cases easier. It is argued that without acknowledging that intersectional discrimination is covered by the EU anti-discrimination Directives, victims of such discrimination, like Mr Parris and others, like headscarf wearing women, might be left without a remedy when they suffer discrimination on a combination of grounds.","PeriodicalId":42250,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law","volume":"74 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13582291241285336","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article it is argued that the CJEU judgment in Parris needs to be revisited to recognise that intersectional discrimination is covered by the EU anti-discrimination Directives. There are several reasons for this. First, a prohibition of intersectional discrimination is now laid down in an EU anti-discrimination Directive (Directive, 2023/970/EC); second, this would fit in with developments in the EU Commission, Council and Parliament; third Parris turns on its own facts; fourth a purposive or capacious interpretation of these Directives already allows for such discrimination to be included in the Directives; fifth, the shift in CJEU case law towards a intra-group comparison for discrimination can make comparisons in intersectional discrimination cases easier. It is argued that without acknowledging that intersectional discrimination is covered by the EU anti-discrimination Directives, victims of such discrimination, like Mr Parris and others, like headscarf wearing women, might be left without a remedy when they suffer discrimination on a combination of grounds.
跨部门歧视与欧盟法律:是时候重新审视帕里斯了
本文认为,需要重新审视欧盟法院在 Parris 案中的判决,以承认欧盟反歧视指令涵盖了交叉歧视。这样做有几个原因。首先,欧盟反歧视指令(指令,2023/970/EC)现已规定禁止交叉歧视;其次,这与欧盟委员会、理事会和议会的发展相吻合;第三,Parris 案是基于其自身的事实;第四,对这些指令的目的性解释或宽泛解释已经允许将此类歧视纳入指令;第五,欧盟法院判例法转向对歧视进行群体内比较,可以使交叉歧视案件的比较更加容易。有观点认为,如果不承认欧盟反歧视指令涵盖了交叉歧视,那么像 Parris 先生和其他一些人(如佩戴头巾的妇女)这样的歧视受害者在遭受基于多种理由的歧视时,就可能得不到补救。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信