WABE (Social policy - Prohibition of discrimination on the grounds of religion or belief - Judgment) [2021] EUECJ C-804/18 (15 July 2021)

WABE (Social policy - Prohibition of discrimination on the grounds of religion or belief - Judgment) [2021] EUECJ C-804/18 (15 July 2021)

A general workplace ban on visible political, philosophical, or religious signs does not constitute direct discrimination if applied in a general and undifferentiated way. Such a ban may constitute indirect discrimination if it places persons of a particular religion at a disadvantage, but can be justified only if the employer demonstrates a genuine need, applies the policy consistently and systematically, and limits the restriction to what is strictly necessary. A ban limited only to conspicuous, large-sized signs is likely to constitute direct discrimination and cannot be justified. National constitutional protections for religious freedom may be considered as more favourable provisions...

Citation
[2021] EUECJ C-804/18
Parties
Applicant (c 804/18): IX; Respondent (c 804/18): WABE eV; Applicant (c 341/19): MJ; Respondent (c 341/19): MH Müller Handels GmbH
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
15 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Ruling (joined Cases C 804/18 and C 341/19) / Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union
Outcome
Preliminary ruling issued; interpretation of Directive 2000/78/EC provided to national courts.
Legal Topics
Freedom of Religion, Indirect Discrimination, Direct Discrimination, Equal Treatment in Employment, Employer Neutrality Policies, Fundamental Rights Under the Charter, Interpretation of Directive 2000/78/ec
EU Law Employment Law Anti Discrimination Law Human Rights Freedom of Religion Indirect Discrimination Direct Discrimination Equal Treatment in Employment +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

IX

Applicant (c 804/18)

WABE eV

Respondent (c 804/18)

MJ

Applicant (c 341/19)

MH Müller Handels GmbH

Respondent (c 341/19)

Procedural Posture

Preliminary Ruling (joined Cases C 804/18 and C 341/19) / Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a general ban on visible political, philosophical or religious signs at work constitutes direct or indirect discrimination under Directive 2000/78/EC
  2. 2 Whether such a ban can be justified by an employer's neutrality policy
  3. 3 Whether national constitutional protections for religious freedom can be considered as more favourable provisions under Article 8(1) of Directive 2000/78/EC

Ratio Decidendi

A general workplace ban on visible political, philosophical, or religious signs does not constitute direct discrimination if applied in a general and undifferentiated way. Such a ban may constitute indirect discrimination if it places persons of a particular religion at a disadvantage, but can be justified only if the employer demonstrates a genuine need, applies the policy consistently and systematically, and limits the restriction to what is strictly necessary. A ban limited only to conspicuous, large-sized signs is likely to constitute direct discrimination and cannot be justified. National constitutional protections for religious freedom may be considered as more favourable provisions...

Court Disposition

Preliminary ruling issued; interpretation of Directive 2000/78/EC provided to national courts.

Orders

  • Article 1 and Article 2(2)(a) of Directive 2000/78/EC: A general ban on visible signs does not constitute direct discrimination if applied generally and undifferentiated.
  • Article 2(2)(b) of Directive 2000/78/EC: Indirect discrimination may be justified only by a genuine need, consistent application, and strict necessity; a ban limited to conspicuous, large-sized signs is likely direct discrimination and not justifiable.