The company declared that it would not employ immigrants to work on certain customers’ houses, saying that the customers would be reluctant to allow access. The Centrum, an anti racist organisation said this was in breach of the Directive, and appealed rejection of its claim.
Held: Such an advertisement would clearly dissuade applicants for employment and therefore was direct discrimination. It was not necessary to show that particular applicants had been dissuaded. The company could bring evidence if it existed to show at its actual recruitment practice was not discriminatory.
 EUECJ C-54/07, Times 16-Jul-2008, C-54/07,  ICR 1390
Council Directive 2000/43/EC of June 29, 2000
Opinion – Centrum Voor Gelijkheid Van Kansen En Voor Racismebestrijding v Firma Feryn NV ECJ 12-Mar-2008
(Social Policy) (Opinion) The defendant company had advertised for workers, but said it was unwilling to employ Morrocans.
Advocate General Maduro expressed the opinion that the Directive must be understood in the framework of a wider policy to . .
Cited – Jivraj v Hashwani SC 27-Jul-2011
The parties had a joint venture agreement which provided that any dispute was to be referred to an arbitrator from the Ismaili community. The claimant said that this method of appointment became void as a discriminatory provision under the 2003 . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 February 2021; Ref: scu.279112