Abstract
The anti-discrimination law regime of the European Union has stimulated the setting-up or improvements of legislation and institutional protection against discrimination at the level of the Member States. While academic debate is mostly focussing on the material part of regulations and if they are sufficient, those affected by discrimination are rather confronted with problems accessing justice. Most cases remain unreported due to a lack of knowledge but also because the investment of bringing a case to court is likely not to be paid back. The EU Anti-Discrimination Directives require Member States to lower the burden of proof and to provide for effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions. Legal practise of courts and other bodies in charge of deciding in discrimination cases, like specialised tribunals, labour inspectorates, administrative authorities or equality bodies shows that the sanction regimes are implemented rather hesitantly. Effectiveness of the sanctions regimes in discrimination cases is furthermore impeded by difficulties in accessing justice first hand and in the widespread lack of enforcement mechanisms once a sanction is there. In order to improve the effectiveness of anti-discrimination law, there is a need of focussing on the perspective of the person or group affected, stimulate a change in attitude at the side of those proceeding a case towards more acceptance of the procedural rules and more creativity, when it comes to the choice of sanctions. Strategic litigation has been a valuable tool in moving further on the path to more effectiveness.
Most of the information provided originate from a study on sanctions and remedies in discrimination cases the author has conducted for Equinet, the network of European equality bodies, and another one on access to justice in discrimination cases for the Fundamental Rights Agency of the European Union (FRA) the author has contributed to.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
FRA (2010).
- 2.
FRA (2014).
- 3.
FRA (2017).
- 4.
FRA (2010).
- 5.
FRA (2017).
- 6.
FRA (2012).
- 7.
Case 54/07, Centrum voor gelijkheid van kansen en voor racismebestrijding v Firma Feryn NV (ECJ 10 July 2008).
- 8.
Racial Equality Directive (Article 8), Employment Equality Directive (Article 10), the Goods and Services Directive (Article 9) and the Recast Gender Directive (Article 19).
- 9.
Case 127/92, Enderby v Frenchay Health Authority (ECJ 27 October 1993), ECR I-5535.
- 10.
Case 81/12, Asociaţia Accept v Consiliul Naţional pentru Combaterea Discriminării (ECJ 25 April 2013).
- 11.
Cohen (2004).
- 12.
Ammer et al. (2010), p. 96.
- 13.
Milieu (2011), p. 39.
- 14.
FRA (2012).
- 15.
FRA (2012), p. 45.
- 16.
Jordache and Ionescu (2014).
- 17.
Appl. no. 67336/01, Danilenkov and Others v Russia (ECtHR, Chamber Judgment 30.09.2009).
- 18.
Case 14/83, Sabine von Colson and Elisabeth Kamann v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen (ECJ 10 April 1984).
- 19.
Case 81/12, Asociaţia Accept v Consiliul Naţional pentru Combaterea Discriminării (ECJ 25 April 2013).
- 20.
Case 177/88, Elisabeth Johanna Pacifica Dekker v Stichting Vormingscentrum voor Jong Volwassenen (VJV-Centrum) Plus (ECJ 8 November 1990).
- 21.
Case C-407/14, MarÃa Auxiliadora Arjona Camacho v Securitas Seguridad España, S.A. (ECJ (Fourth Chamber) 17 December 2015).
- 22.
Case C-271/91, M. Helen Marshall v Southampton and South-West Hampshire Area Health Authority (ECJ 2 August 1993).
- 23.
Case C-180/95, Nils Draehmpaehl v Urania Immobilienservice OHG (ECJ 22 April 1997).
- 24.
Council Direktive 2006/54/EC on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation (recast), OJ L 204/23 (2006).
- 25.
Case 177/88, Elisabeth Johanna Pacifica Dekker v Stichting Vormingscentrum voor Jong Volwassenen (VJV-Centrum) Plus (ECJ 8 November 1990).
- 26.
Case 54/07, Centrum voor gelijkheid van kansen en voor racismebestrijding v Firma Feryn NV (ECJ 10 July 2008).
- 27.
Appl. no. 38285/09, GarcÃa Mateos v Spain (ECtHR Judgment 19 February 2013).
- 28.
Mostly FRA (2012), p. 46.
- 29.
Wladasch (2015).
References
Ammer, Margit, Niall Crowley, Barbara Liegl, Elisabeth Holzleithner, Kathrin Wladasch, and Kutsal Yesilkagit. 2010. Study on Equality Bodies Set Up under Directives 2000/43/EC, 2004/113/EC and 2006/54/EC – Synthesis Report. <https://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=6454>. Accessed 30 June 2019.
Cohen, Barbara. 2004. Remedies and Sanctions for Discrimination in Working Life under the EC Anti-Discrimination Directives. In Discrimination in the Working Life: Remedies and Enforcement, Towards the Uniform and Dynamic Implementation of EU Anti-Discrimination Legislation: The Role of Equality Bodies, Report of the fourth experts’ meeting, hosted by the Swedish Ombudsman Against Ethnic Discrimination, 14–15 October 2013. pp. 16–25 <www.equineteurope.org/.../EN_-_Discrimination_in_Working_Life.pdf>. Accessed 14 October 2019.
FRA. 2010. EU Midis: Data in Focus Report 3: Rights Awareness and Equality Bodies. <https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/854-EU-MIDIS_RIGHTS_AWARENESS_EN.PDF>. Accessed 30 June 2019.
———. 2012. Access to Justice in Cases of Discrimination in the EU – Steps to Further Equality. <https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra-2012-access-to-justice-social.pdf>. Accessed 30 June 2019.
———. 2014. EU LGBT Survey, European Union Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Survey. Main Results. <https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra-eu-lgbt-survey-main-results_tk3113640enc_1.pdf>. Accessed 30 June 2019.
———. 2017. Second European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey Muslims – Selected findings. <https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2017-eu-minorities-survey-muslims-selected-findings_en.pdf>. Accessed 30 June 2019.
Jordache, Romanita, and Iustina Ionescu. 2014. Discrimination and its Sanctions – Symbolic vs. Effective Remedies in European Anti-Discrimination Law. European Anti-Discrimination Law Review 19: 11–24.
Milieu. 2011. Comparative Study on Access to Justice in Gender Equality and Anti-Discrimination Law, Study Prepared for the European Commission. <https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/c3fe272d-f5e6-47d6-b06b-e481a179c564>. Accessed 30 June 2019.
Wladasch, Katrin. 2015. The Sanctions Regime in Discrimination Cases and its Effects. An Equinet Paper. <www.archive.equineteurope.org/IMG/pdf/sanctions_regime_discrimination_-_final_for_web.pdf>. Accessed 14 October 2019.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wladasch, K. (2020). Making Antidiscrimination Law Effective: Burden of Proof, Remedies and Sanctions in Discrimination Cases. In: Giegerich, T. (eds) The European Union as Protector and Promoter of Equality. European Union and its Neighbours in a Globalized World, vol 1. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43764-0_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43764-0_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-43763-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-43764-0
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)