Two Views of ‘Subordination’: the Personal Scope of Employment Discrimination Law in Jivraj v Hashwani

In Jivraj v Hashwani, the Supreme Court considered what requirements are necessary for a relationship to be considered as an employment relationship for the purposes of determining the scope of domestic employment discrimination law. The Court held that an element of subordination was necessary for the relationship to be considered employment under a contract personally to do work. This article discusses what the Court in Jivraj meant by this requirement, contrasting two differing views of subordination. It examines some implications of the decision for the relationship between employment law and anti-discrimination law, and for recent debates on the scope of employment law more generally.

Enforcing Employment Discrimination Law - Potential Transplants from Italy to Britain and Vice Versa?

While substantive EU non-discrimination law has been harmonized in great detail, the enforcement regime for EU non-discrimination law consists merely of a few isolated elements. Thus, the pursuit of unity through harmonization in substantive EU law is accompanied by considerable regulatory autonomy for Member States in securing the efficiency of those laws, reflecting the diversity of national enforcement regimes, and resulting in twenty-seven different national models for enforcing discrimination law in labour markets. This article pursues two connected arguments through a comparison of rules for enforcing non-discrimination law in labour markets in Britain and Italy. First, it argues that enforcing non-discrimination law in labour markets is best achieved when responsive governance, repressive regulation and mainstreaming equality law are combined. Second, the article submits that diversity of national legal orders within the EU is not necessarily detrimental, as it offers opportunities for mutual learning across legal systems.The notion of mutual learning across systems is proposed in order to analyse the transnational migration of legal ideas within the EU. Such migration has been criticized in debates about the ‘transplantation’ of legal concepts or legal irritation through foreign legal ideas, in particular by comparative labour lawyers. However, EU harmonization policies in the field of non-discrimination law aim to impact on national labour laws. The article develops the notion of mutual learning across legal systems in order to establish conditions for transnational migration of legal ideas, and demonstrates the viability of these concepts by applying them to the field of non-discrimination law

Short comment: To Nail a Jellyfish? Finding a progressive agenda for EU anti-discrimination law

The title of this short (about 4500 words) intervention translates to "To Nail a Jellyfish? Finding a progressive agenda for EU anti-discrimination law". I engage with those criticising EU anti-discrimination law as yet another emanation of the EU's "neo-liberal" nature which fails to establish a viable social policy regime. I criticise this in two directions. First, I take issue with the theory that anti-discrimination law and policy has to be part of social policy. Actually, the field has a mission which differs from social policy, in that it addresses disadvantage resulting from othering, combating stereotypes as well as promoting accomodation of difference. Second, I show how the critique of judicialisation of policy is not unique to anti-discrimination law and policy. The so called turn to rights based employment law has been criticised under this mantra by those who fear that collective labour law mechanisms will become less prevalent. Further, those who have engaged with anti-discrimination law for a much longer time than those criticising it have also devised means to overcome the individualistic tendencies of rights adjudication. They have (partly successfully) argued in favour of establishing equality bodies and creating positive obligations. Thus, the critique neglects the field it takes on, and does not accept the fact that anti-discrimination law and policy must be considered a field in its own right instead of the servant of social law and policy.
Now, this is more a summary than an abstract - since I realise that not everyone reads German.

Cases, Materials and Text on National, Supranational and International Non-Discrimination Law

This casebook, the result of the collaborative efforts of a panel of experts from various EU Member States, is the latest in the Ius Commune Casebook series developed at the Universities of Maastricht and Leuven. The book provides a comprehensive and skilfully designed resource for students, practitioners, researchers, public officials, NGOs, consumer organisations and the judiciary. In common with earlier books in the series, this casebook presents cases and other materials (legislative materials, international and European materials, excerpts from books or articles). As non-discrimination law is a comparatively new subject, the chapters search for and develop the concepts of discrimination law on the basis of a wide variety of young and often still emerging case law and legislation. The result is a comprehensive textbook with materials from a wide variety of EU Member States. The book is entirely in English (i.e. materials are translated where not available in English). At the end of each chapter a comparative overview ties the material together, with emphasis, where appropriate, on existing or emerging general principles in the legal systems within Europe.
The book illustrates the distinct relationship between international, European and national legislation in the field of non-discrimination law. It covers the grounds of discrimination addressed in the Racial Equality and Employment Equality Directives, as well as non-discrimination law relating to gender. In so doing, it covers the law of a large number of EU Member States, alongside some international comparisons.
The Ius Commune Casebook on Non-Discrimination Law
- provides practitioners with ready access to primary and secondary legal material needed to assist them in crafting test case strategies.
- provides the judiciary with the tools needed to respond sensitively to such cases.
- provides material for teaching non-discrimination law to law and other students.
- provides a basis for ongoing research on non-discrimination law.
- provides an up-to-date overview of the implementation of the Directives and of the state of the law.
This Casebook is the result of a project which has been supported by a grant from the European Commission's Anti-Discrimination Programme.

European Union Non-Discrimination Law: Comparative Perspectives on Multidimensional Equality Law

EU equality law is multidimensional in being based on different rationales and concepts. Consequently, the concept of discrimination has become fragmented, with different instruments envisaging different scopes of protection. This raises questions as to the ability of EU law to address the situation of persons excluded on a number of grounds. This edited collection addresses the increasing complexity of European Equality Law from jurisprudential, sociological and political science perspectives. Internationally renowned researchers from Scandinavian, Continental and Central European countries and Britain analyse consequences of multiplying discrimination grounds within EU equality law, considering its multidimensionality and intersectionality. The contributors to the volume theorise the move from formal to substantive equality law and its interrelation to new forms of governance, demonstrating the specific combination of non-discrimination law with welfare state models which reveal the global implications of the European Union. The book will be of interest to academics and policy makers all over the world, in particular to those researching and studying law, political sciences and sociology with an interest in human rights, non discrimination law, contract and employment law or European studies.

Heritage property, tourism and the UK Disability Discrimination Act

Heritage tourism depends on a physical resource based primarily on listed buildings and scheduled monuments. Visiting or staying in a historic building provides a rich tourism experience, but historic environments date from eras when access for disabled people was not a consideration. Current UK Government policy now promotes social inclusion via an array of equal opportunities, widening participation and anti-discrimination policies. Historic environments enjoy considerable legislative protection from adverse change, but now need to balance conservation with public access for all. This paper discusses the basis of research being undertaken by The College of Estate Management funded by the Mercers Company of London and the Harold Samuel Trust. It assesses how the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act has changed the legal obligations of owners/operators in managing access to listed buildings in tourism use. It also examines the key stakeholders and power structures in the management of historic buildings and distinguishes other important players in the management process.

Against settlement? Owen Fiss, ADR and Australian discrimination law

In his celebrated article, Against Settlement, Owen Fiss objected to settlement for, among other things, securing the peace while not necessarily delivering justice and denying the court the opportunity to interpret the law. Fiss sees settlement as a technique for streamlining court dockets, the civil equivalent of plea bargaining. This paper explores Fiss’s criticisms through the lens of resolving discrimination complaints in Australia. It argues that although it is valuable to offer complainants a system for resolving complaints quickly and informally, especially in a jurisdiction in which complainants are often from marginalised groups, it is also necessary to recognise that this system is limited in how effectively it can develop the law and, by extension, eradicate discrimination. In essence, the system’s operation epitomises Fiss’ opposition to settlement. Modifying the complaint resolution system would improve this situation. The paper concludes by proposing three reforms based on mechanisms used in comparable countries: introducing direct access to the court or tribunal; strengthening ADR by making it voluntary and incorporating a ‘rights-based’ approach; and encouraging the regular publication of specific information about settlements and significant cases.

Strategic enforcement of anti-discrimination law : a new role for Australia's equality commissions

In Australia, anti-discrimination law is enforced by individuals who lodge a discrimination complaint at a statutory equality commission. The equality commission is responsible for handling complaints and attempting to resolve them. In most instances, the equality commission cannot advise or assist the complainant; it must remain neutral. In other countries, the equality commission plays a role in enforcement, principally by providing complainants with assistance to resolve their complaint including funding litigation. The equality commission’s assistance function has been most effective when used strategically as part of a broader enforcement program, rather than on an ad hoc basis. This article discusses equality commission enforcement in the United States of America, Britain, Northern Ireland and Ireland and shows how the equality commissions have engaged in strategic enforcement in order to develop the law and secure remedies which benefit the wider community, not only the individual complainant. Based on their experience, it is argued that the Australian equality commissions should play a role in enforcement so that they can tackle discrimination more effectively.

Australian anti-discrimination law

This is the first major Australian anti-discrimination law text book which contains a comprehensive and critical examination of the major statutes and cases in all jurisdictions.

Wielding the big stick – Lessons for enforcing anti-discrimination law from the Fair Work Ombudsman

Anti-discrimination law is enforced by a person who has experienced discrimination by lodging a complaint at a statutory equal opportunity agency. The agency is responsible for receiving and resolving discrimination complaints and educating the community; it does not play a role in enforcing the law. The agency relies on ‘carrots’ to encourage voluntary compliance, but it does not wield any ‘sticks’. This is not the case in other areas of law, such as industrial relations, where the Fair Work Ombudsman is charged with enforcing the law — including the prohibition of discrimination in the workplace — and possesses the necessary powers to do so. British academics Hepple, Coussey and Choudhury developed an enforcement pyramid for equal opportunity. This article shows that the model used by the Fair Work Ombudsman reflects what Hepple, Coussey and Choudhury propose, while anti-discrimination law enforcement would be represented as a flat, rectangular structure. The article considers the Fair Work Ombudsman’s discrimination enforcement work to date and identifies some lessons that anti-discrimination law enforcement can learn from its experience.

Manual of state employment security legislation. Supplement: Draft language with commentary for a state temporary disability insurance law coordinated with unemployment insurance.

Mode of access: Internet.