The European Court of Justice and the march towards substantive equality in European Union anti-discrimination law

Author:

De Vos Marc1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Macquarie University Law School, Macquarie Park, New South Wales, Australia

Abstract

European Union (EU) anti-discrimination law has developed under a mostly formal, procedural Aristotelian approach to equality, driven by seminal European case law and incorporated into a body of EU non-discrimination directives. The academic literature has criticized this approach as formalistic and static (Formal equality, non-discrimination and European Union (EU) law section). Against this backdrop, this article explores how the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) embraces substantive equality dimensions of non-discrimination. It documents standout cases supporting substantive equality in direct and indirect discrimination (Direct discrimination is less formal than meets the eye and Indirect discrimination is substantive at heart sections). It explores how the CJEU has promoted substantive equality in cases of non-discriminatory differential treatment (Compulsory differential treatment makes formal equality substantive section) and through positive action or discrimination (Positive action can become substantive positive discrimination section). It unearths a wider scope for substantive positive discrimination when constructed as a limitation of, rather than an exception to, formal equality (Substantive positive discrimination can limit formal equality section). It frames the evolution towards substantive equality in the broader fundamental rights context that has become the EU law context, as applied in seminal CJEU cases (Formal anti-discrimination supports and reflects overall substantive equality section). It shows how formal EU equality law has always supported substantive equality and has gradually been mobilized to further substantive equality aims, redefining piecemeal the overarching purpose of EU equality law in the process while increasing concerns of transparency and legitimacy (Conclusion: pragmatism, discretion and legitimacy section).

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Law,Sociology and Political Science

Cited by 18 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3