Prevalence of an Economic Right/Freedom Over a Social Right in a Horizontal Litigation Once Again

The article primarily examines the Achbita judgment within the context of the struck balance of competing rights/freedoms, i.e., the right to manifest religion and the freedom to conduct a business. It argues that with its lenient and one-sided application of proportionality and by affording the freedom to conduct a business of an employer almost an unfettered prerogative against the right to religious manifestation of an employee, the Achbita judgment could be included into the line of case law, such as Viking, Laval, Alemo-Herron and AGET-Iraklis, which provides for preference and prevalence of economic rights/freedoms over conflicting social rights. The judgment even extends that preference and prevalence to the fields having no crossborder element. If not having confirmed horizontal direct effect of Article 16 of the Charter and so recognized it in nature as a right rather than a principle in the sense of Article 52(5) of the Charter, the CJEU paves the way for consolidating this judicial trend. As a consequence in respect of the principle of non-discrimination on certain grounds, the judgment establishes different levels of protection for different grounds of discrimination and consolidates it by downplaying the right to manifest religion towards the bottom. Headscarf, the Principle of Non-Discrimination on the Grounds of Religion, Freedom to Conduct a Business, Corporate Neutrality Policy, the Margin of Appreciation of the Member States, the Hierarchy between the Grounds of Discrimination, Intersectional Discrimination