Context

The 25 February 2003 Anti-Discrimination Act is aimed to prevent discriminatory behaviours, i.e. not objectively and reasonably justified differences in treatment based on attributes such as sex, race, sexual preference, national or ethnic origin, civil status, age, religion, birth, wealth, current or future health, handicap or physical characteristics. This act is notably applicable to professional relationships, hence to employers.

News

As the Act is aimed to prevent ANY kind of discrimination, the Court found that listing the criteria on which discrimination could arise was too restrictive and set it aside.

Consequences

The Court’s decision has thus considerably enlarged what discrimination may mean under the Act.

Furthermore, it may have an even greater impact at the level of employment relations. Indeed, the Act considers a difference in treatment as nondiscriminatory if the differentiating attribute forms a substantial and determining job requirement in view of the nature of the professional activity or the context within which it is carried on. Some common differences in treatment based on, say, the nature of the employment agreement (blue-collar vs. white-collar), seniority, etc., may thus not comply with the Anti-Discrimination Act.

It may be beneficial to employers to re-consider the compliance of their Human Resource policies and practices (recruitment, selection, reward, learning and education, etc.) in view of the enlarged scope of the Anti-Discrimination Act.