S Coleman v Attridge Law, Steve Law: ECJ 31 Jan 2008

ECJ (Opinion) The claimant accepted voluntary redundancy, but then alleged disability discrimination and constructive dismissal. She claimed to have been subjected to unfair treatment because she had a disabled son, whose primary carer she was. She relied on the protection afforded by the Framework Directive against discrimination ‘on grounds of disability’ as informing the construction of the material provisions contained in the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.
Held: Upholding this approach on a reference by the ET for a preliminary ruling, the Court of Justice stated: ‘ [I]t does not follow from those provisions of Directive 2000/78 that the principle of equal treatment which it is designed to safeguard is limited to people who themselves have a disability within the meaning of the Directive. On the contrary, the purpose of the Directive, as regards employment and occupation, is to combat all forms of discrimination on grounds of disability. The principle of equal treatment enshrined in the Directive in that area applies not to a particular category of person but by reference to the grounds mentioned in Article 1. That interpretation is supported by the wording of Article 13 EC, which constitutes the legal basis of Directive 2000/78, and which confers on the Community the competence to take appropriate action to combat discrimination based, inter alia, on disability. . . . Although, in a situation such as that in the present case, the person who is subject to direct discrimination on grounds of disability is not herself disabled, the fact remains that it is the disability which, according to Ms Coleman, is the ground for the less favourable treatment which she claims to have suffered. As is apparent from paragraph 38 of this judgment, Directive 2000/78, which seeks to combat all forms of discrimination on grounds of disability in the field of employment and occupation, applies not to a particular category of person but by reference to the grounds mentioned in Article 1.’
The claimant said that her employers had discriminated against her by refusing her time to care for her disabled son.
Held: ‘directly targeting a person who has a particular characteristic is not the only way of discriminating against him or her; there are also other, more subtle and less obvious ways of doing so. One way of undermining the dignity and autonomy of people who belong to a certain group is to target not them, but third persons who are closely associated with them and do not themselves belong to the group. A robust conception of equality entails that these subtler forms of discrimination should also be caught by anti-discrimination legislation, as they, too, affect the persons belonging to suspect classifications. ‘
C-303/06, [2008] EUECJ C-303/06, [2008] IRLR 722, [2008] ICR 1128
Bailii
Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, Disability Discrimination Act 1995
European
Citing:
Reference fromAttridge Law (A Firm of Solicitors) v Coleman and Law EAT 20-Dec-2006
The claimant asserted associative disability discrimination. She was the carer for her disabled son.
Held: To succeed the claimant would have to show that associative discrimination was prohibited by the directive and that the 1995 Act could . .

Cited by:
OpinionColeman v Attridge Law, Law ECJ 17-Jul-2008
ECJ Grand Chamber – Social policy – Directive 2000/78/EC – Equal treatment in employment and occupation – Articles 1, 2(1), (2)(a) and (3) and 3(1)(c) – Direct discrimination on grounds of disability – Harassment . .
CitedEnglish v Thomas Sanderson Ltd CA 19-Dec-2008
The claimant appealed dismissal of his claim for harrassment and sex discrimination. Though heterosexual, he had been subject to persistent jokes that he was homosexual. The court first asked whether the alleged conduct was ‘on the grounds of sexual . .
OpinionS. Coleman v Attridge Law, Steve Law ECJ 17-Jul-2008
ECJ Social policy – Directive 2000/78/EC – Equal treatment in employment and occupation – Articles 1, 2(1), (2)(a) and (3) and 3(1)(c) – Direct discrimination on grounds of disability – Harassment related to . .
ECJ OpinionEBR Attridge Law Llp and Another v Coleman EAT 30-Oct-2009
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – ‘Associative’ discrimination
The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 can be interpreted so as to apply to ‘associative’ discrimination as required by the decision of the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 September 2021; Ref: scu.264047