130:
market in question or the personal situation of the person concerned, is objectively necessary to the attainment of the objective which is the vocational integration of unemployed older workers, it must be considered to go beyond what is appropriate and necessary in order to attain the objective pursued. Observance of the principle of proportionality requires every derogation from an individual right to reconcile, so far as is possible, the requirements of the principle of equal treatment with those of the aim pursued (see, to that effect, Case C-476/99
126:
unemployment, may lawfully, until the age at which they may claim their entitlement to a retirement pension, be offered fixed-term contracts of employment which may be renewed an indefinite number of times. This significant body of workers, determined solely on the basis of age, is thus in danger, during a substantial part of its members’ working life, of being excluded from the benefit of stable employment which, however, as the
Framework Agreement makes clear, constitutes a major element in the protection of workers.
168:
state and EU legislation, like
Directives, may be challenged on the ground that they fail to comply with the general principle of equal treatment. Third, because the court did not limit its remarks to the particular grounds of discrimination presently found in the equal treatment Directives (on sex, race, and disability, belief, sexual orientation and age) it follows that claims against discrimination on the basis of other characteristics may be possible (such as
121:, even though it did not have to be implemented until the end of 2006. It said that, in general terms, legislation that lets employers treat people differently because of their age “offends the principle” in international law of eliminating discrimination on the basis of age. The ECJ ruled that national courts must set aside any provision of national law which conflicts with the directive even before the period for implementation has expired.
109:) which allowed fixed term contracts for a two-year maximum, and otherwise were unlawful unless they could be objectively justified. But even this protection was removed (apparently to "promote employment") if the employee was over 60. Further amendments then changed the age to 52. Mr Mangold claimed that the lack of protection, over age 52, was unjustified age discrimination.
561:
251:
146:
Directive 1999/70 (see also, in this respect, paragraphs 51 and 64 above), and reference is made to the Court for a preliminary ruling, the Court must provide all the criteria of interpretation needed by the national court to determine whether those rules are compatible with such a principle (Case C-442/00
153:
76. Consequently, observance of the general principle of equal treatment, in particular in respect of age, cannot as such be conditional upon the expiry of the period allowed the Member States for the transposition of a directive intended to lay down a general framework for combating discrimination
145:
75. The principle of non-discrimination on grounds of age must thus be regarded as a general principle of
Community law. Where national rules fall within the scope of Community law, which is the case with Paragraph 14(3) of the TzBfG, as amended by the Law of 2002, as being a measure implementing
125:
64. ... application of national legislation such as that at issue in the main proceedings leads to a situation in which all workers who have reached the age of 52, without distinction, whether or not they were unemployed before the contract was concluded and whatever the duration of any period of
167:
is significant for three critical reasons. First, it means that a claim for equal treatment is available for private citizens on a horizontal situation. It is not necessary to wait for a
Directive to be implemented before making a claim to have caused discrimination. Second, it means that member
129:
65. In so far as such legislation takes the age of the worker concerned as the only criterion for the application of a fixed-term contract of employment, when it has not been shown that fixing an age threshold, as such, regardless of any other consideration linked to the structure of the labour
154:
on the grounds of age, in particular so far as the organisation of appropriate legal remedies, the burden of proof, protection against victimisation, social dialogue, affirmative action and other specific measures to implement such a directive are concerned.
311:
707:
229:
408:
623:
506:
213:
576:
338:
606:
520:
712:
118:
464:
546:
300:
264:
449:
288:
591:
181:
177:
401:
206:
394:
78:
54:
276:
199:
82:
717:
240:
476:
136:
ECR I‑2891, paragraph 39). Such national legislation cannot, therefore, be justified under
Article 6(1) of
630:
613:
596:
581:
566:
551:
496:
481:
454:
137:
491:
367:
358:
349:
184:
which lists similar grounds to those already in the EU Directives but also adds "or other status".
533:
424:
437:
176:, property or military service). It would be likely to reflect the jurisprudence from the
102:
536:
427:
386:
17:
701:
656:
651:
640:
98:
101:. The German government introduced the so-called Employment Promotion Act 1996 (
163:
Because it recognised that equal treatment is a general principle of EU law,
173:
132:
94:
191:
377:
29:
European Court of
Justice case about age discrimination in employment
169:
390:
195:
117:
The ECJ held in its judgment the German law contravened the
97:
man employed on a fixed term contract in a permanent
60:
49:
41:
36:
123:
85:(ECJ) about age discrimination in employment.
708:Anti-discrimination law in the European Union
625:Allonby v Accrington & Rossendale College
402:
207:
8:
508:Lambeth LBC v Commission for Racial Equality
409:
395:
387:
214:
200:
192:
33:
608:Kutz-Bauer v Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg
522:Tottenham Green Nursery v Marshall (No 2)
667:
562:Kontofunktionaerernes Forbund v Danfoss
119:Employment Equality Framework Directive
465:R (Amicus) v SS for Trade and Industry
577:Rinner-Kühn v FWW Gebäudereinigung KG
547:Bilka-Kaufhaus GmbH v Weber von Hartz
339:Kücükdeveci v Swedex GmbH & Co KG
314:R (Seymour-Smith) v SS for Employment
301:Abrahamsson and Anderson v Fogelqvist
265:Bilka-Kaufhaus GmbH v Weber von Hartz
7:
450:Johnston v Royal Ulster Constabulary
417:Sources on justifying discrimination
289:Marschall v Land Nordrhein Westfalen
592:Nimz v Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg
178:European Convention on Human Rights
150:ECR I-11915, paragraphs 30 to 32).
25:
277:Barber v Guardian Royal Exchange
713:European Union labour case law
107:Beschäftigungsförderungsgesetz
1:
66:Equality, age discrimination
734:
93:Mangold was a 56-year-old
637:
620:
603:
588:
573:
558:
543:
531:
517:
503:
488:
473:
461:
446:
434:
422:
374:
365:
356:
347:
335:
323:
309:
297:
285:
273:
261:
249:
237:
227:
83:European Court of Justice
65:
45:European Court of Justice
692:A Casebook on Labour Law
676:A Casebook on Labour Law
241:Defrenne v Sabena (No 2)
477:Sirdar v The Army Board
253:Handels-og KF v Danfoss
694:(Hart 2019) ch 15, 657
678:(Hart 2019) ch 15, 657
156:
106:
81:was a case before the
18:Mangold v Rudiger Helm
368:Directive 2000/78/EC
359:Directive 2000/43/EC
350:Directive 2006/54/EC
222:EU equality sources
148:Rodríguez Caballero
280:(1990) Case 262/88
647:
646:
534:Equality Act 2010
425:Equality Act 2010
384:
383:
138:Directive 2000/78
70:
69:
16:(Redirected from
725:
679:
672:
626:
609:
523:
509:
438:Etam plc v Rowan
411:
404:
397:
388:
316:
216:
209:
202:
193:
34:
21:
733:
732:
728:
727:
726:
724:
723:
722:
718:Ageism case law
698:
697:
687:
682:
673:
669:
665:
648:
643:
633:
624:
616:
607:
599:
584:
569:
554:
539:
527:
521:
513:
507:
499:
492:Kreil v Germany
484:
469:
457:
442:
430:
418:
415:
385:
380:
370:
361:
352:
343:
331:
319:
312:
305:
304:(2000) C-407/98
293:
292:(1997) C-409/95
281:
269:
268:(1984) C-170/84
257:
245:
233:
223:
220:
190:
161:
115:
91:
30:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
731:
729:
721:
720:
715:
710:
700:
699:
696:
695:
686:
683:
681:
680:
666:
664:
661:
660:
659:
654:
645:
644:
638:
635:
634:
621:
618:
617:
604:
601:
600:
589:
586:
585:
574:
571:
570:
559:
556:
555:
544:
541:
540:
532:
529:
528:
518:
515:
514:
504:
501:
500:
489:
486:
485:
474:
471:
470:
462:
459:
458:
447:
444:
443:
435:
432:
431:
423:
420:
419:
416:
414:
413:
406:
399:
391:
382:
381:
375:
372:
371:
366:
363:
362:
357:
354:
353:
348:
345:
344:
336:
333:
332:
327:Mangold v Helm
324:
321:
320:
310:
307:
306:
298:
295:
294:
286:
283:
282:
274:
271:
270:
262:
259:
258:
250:
247:
246:
238:
235:
234:
228:
225:
224:
221:
219:
218:
211:
204:
196:
189:
186:
165:Mangold v Helm
160:
157:
114:
111:
90:
87:
74:Mangold v Helm
68:
67:
63:
62:
58:
57:
51:
47:
46:
43:
39:
38:
37:Mangold v Helm
28:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
730:
719:
716:
714:
711:
709:
706:
705:
703:
693:
690:E McGaughey,
689:
688:
684:
677:
674:E McGaughey,
671:
668:
662:
658:
657:EU labour law
655:
653:
652:UK labour law
650:
649:
642:
641:UK labour law
636:
632:
628:
627:
619:
615:
611:
610:
602:
598:
594:
593:
587:
583:
579:
578:
572:
568:
564:
563:
557:
553:
549:
548:
542:
538:
535:
530:
525:
524:
516:
511:
510:
502:
498:
494:
493:
487:
483:
479:
478:
472:
467:
466:
460:
456:
452:
451:
445:
440:
439:
433:
429:
426:
421:
412:
407:
405:
400:
398:
393:
392:
389:
379:
373:
369:
364:
360:
355:
351:
346:
341:
340:
334:
329:
328:
322:
317:
315:
308:
303:
302:
296:
291:
290:
284:
279:
278:
272:
267:
266:
260:
255:
254:
248:
243:
242:
236:
231:
226:
217:
212:
210:
205:
203:
198:
197:
194:
187:
185:
183:
179:
175:
171:
166:
158:
155:
151:
149:
143:
141:
139:
135:
134:
127:
122:
120:
112:
110:
108:
104:
100:
99:full-time job
96:
88:
86:
84:
80:
76:
75:
64:
59:
56:
52:
48:
44:
40:
35:
32:
27:
19:
691:
675:
670:
622:
605:
590:
575:
560:
545:
519:
505:
490:
475:
463:
448:
436:
337:
326:
325:
313:
299:
287:
275:
263:
252:
239:
164:
162:
159:Significance
152:
147:
144:
142:
131:
128:
124:
116:
92:
73:
72:
71:
31:
26:
702:Categories
685:References
537:s 19(2)(d)
182:Article 14
174:education
631:C-256/01
614:C-187/00
597:C-184/89
582:C-171/88
567:C-109/88
552:C-170/84
497:C-285/98
482:C-273/97
468:EWHC 860
455:C-222/84
441:IRLR 150
188:See also
180:, where
113:Judgment
79:C-144/04
61:Keywords
55:C-144/04
50:Citation
629:(2004)
612:(2003)
595:(1991)
580:(1989)
565:(1989)
550:(1984)
526:ICR 320
512:ICR 768
495:(2000)
480:(1999)
453:(1986)
232:art 157
133:Lommers
77:(2005)
53:(2005)
378:EU law
342:(2010)
330:(2005)
318:(1999)
256:(1989)
244:(1976)
103:German
95:German
663:Notes
428:Sch 9
170:caste
89:Facts
42:Court
639:see
376:See
230:TFEU
704::
172:,
140:.
105::
410:e
403:t
396:v
215:e
208:t
201:v
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.