Search results

• Case C-30/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta domstolen (Sweden) lodged on 10 January 2019 — Diskrimineringsombudsmannen v Braathens Regional Aviation AB

  • Published: 2019-01-10
  • Corporate Author(s): Court of Justice (Court of Justice of the European Union)
  • Subject: administrative sanction, equal treatment, indemnification, racial discrimination
• 

  Antisemitism
  Overview of data available in the European Union 2007–2017

  Latest edition.

  This annual overview compiles the available evidence on antisemitic incidents collected by governmental and non-governmental sources, covering the period 1 January 2007–31 December 2017, where data are available. In addition, it includes a section that presents evidence from international organi...

  This annual overview compiles the available evidence on antisemitic incidents collected by governmental and non-governmental sources, covering the period 1 January 2007–31 December 2017, where data are available. In addition, it includes a section that presents evidence from international organisations.

  • Published: 2018-11-06
  • Corporate Author(s): European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (EU body or agency)
  • Subject: anti-semitism, data collection, ethnic discrimination, EU Member State, extremism, Jew, racial discrimination, racism, religious discrimination, rights of the individual
• 

  Experiences and perceptions of antisemitism
  Second survey on discrimination and hate crime against Jews in the EU : questionnaire

  • Published: 2018-12-10
  • Corporate Author(s): European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (EU body or agency)
  • Subject: anti-semitism, crime against individuals, Jew, racial discrimination, religious discrimination, rights of the individual, social survey, sociocultural group
• 

  A comparative analysis of non-discrimination law in Europe 2018
  The 28 EU Member States, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Montenegro, Norway, Serbia and Turkey compared

  The objective of this report is to compare and contrast anti-discrimination law in the 28 EU Member States, four EU candidate countries (namely the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey) and the EEA countries (Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway), based on the 2017 u...

  The objective of this report is to compare and contrast anti-discrimination law in the 28 EU Member States, four EU candidate countries (namely the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey) and the EEA countries (Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway), based on the 2017 updates of the country reports written by the European network of legal experts in gender equality and nondiscrimination. The state of play and the major developments are summarised in this publication. The report presents the general trends in European anti-discrimination policy and points out some of the remaining dilemmas in the application of anti-discrimination legislation. It gives an overview of the main substantive issues in both directives: the grounds of discrimination, the definition of grounds and scope, exceptions to the principle of equal treatment and positive action, access to justice and effective enforcement, and Equality Bodies. All Member States were required to review and amend their existing legislation to comply with the requirements of the directives. The Racial Equality Directive and the Employment Equality Directive had to be transposed into national law by 19 July 2003 and 2 December 2003 respectively in the (then) 15 EU Member States. Countries acceding the EU after this date had to transpose both directives by the date of their accession: 1 May 2004 for 10 new Member States, 1 January 2007 for Bulgaria and Romania, and finally 1 July 2013 for Croatia. The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey entered the transposition process and they must align their national legislation with EU law by the date on which they enter the EU. EU directives on anti-discrimination are not binding on EEA countries, as the EEA agreement only provides obligations on those countries vis-à-vis EU legislation related to the internal market. In practice, provisions on anti-discrimination exist, but the level of protection varies greatly compared with EU standards. It goes beyond the scope of this report to assess the extent to which Member States have fully complied with the directives or to assess the legislative impact of the European directives on the laws of all the countries examined. However, the report could potentially be used as one of the instruments for making such an assessment. Ambiguities in the directives became apparent in the transposition process. This report will not seek to clarify these gaps, although, where appropriate, the report makes some suggestions to that effect. This synthesis overview of the national situation in 35 countries is complemented by the comprehensive country reports. Readers can turn to these country reports for detailed and nuanced information about the law of a particular country, current as of 1 January 2017.

  • Published: 2019-01-04
  • Corporate Author(s): Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers (European Commission) ; European network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination
  • Subject: age discrimination, anti-discriminatory measure, application of EU law, comparative analysis, discrimination based on disability, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, ethnic discrimination, EU Member State, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Montenegro, Norway, racial discrimination, religious discrimination, report, Serbia, sexual discrimination, Turkey
• Case C-457/17: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 15 November 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Heiko Jonny Maniero v Studienstiftung des deutschen Volkes eV (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin — Directive 2000/43/EC — Article 3(1)(g) — Scope — Concept of ‘education’ — The award by a private foundation of scholarships aimed at promoting projects for legal research and studies abroad — Article 2(2)(b) — Indirect discrimination — Award of scholarships conditional on applicants having first passed the First State Law Examination (Erste Juristische Staatsprüfung))

  • Published: 2018-11-15
  • Corporate Author(s): Court of Justice (Court of Justice of the European Union)
  • Subject: education grant, equal treatment, equivalence of diplomas, ethnic discrimination, EU national, foundation, racial discrimination
• Mid-term evaluation of the EU Framework for national Roma integration
  

  This midterm review takes stock of the progress since the launch of the EU framework for national Roma integration strategies (NRISs) in 2011. It is based on data on how the situation of Roma have changed and input from national authorities, civil society and other partners. The review confirms ...

  This midterm review takes stock of the progress since the launch of the EU framework for national Roma integration strategies (NRISs) in 2011. It is based on data on how the situation of Roma have changed and input from national authorities, civil society and other partners. The review confirms the added value of the framework, the relevance of EU Roma integration goals and the continued need for a combination of targeted and mainstream approaches. The most important improvements prompted by the EU framework include:  the commitment to addressing Roma integration as a priority at European and national levels  structures for cooperation and coordination among Roma inclusion stakeholders  the development, implementation and monitoring of national strategies and integration measures, and  the mobilisation and alignment of legal, policy and funding instruments to fight discrimination and promote Roma inclusion With the development of the necessary structures, the conditions are in place to make a difference in the life of Roma. As regards real change in the situation of Roma between 2011 and 2016, however, it is clear that five years is too short a period to undo centuries of discrimination and deprivation. Progress is visible mainly in the area of education; in particular, the growing participation of Roma children in early childhood education and care points to strong potential for their later development. On the other hand, early school-leaving and poverty risk among Roma, though declining, are still far too high. The growing proportion of young Roma who are not in education, employment or training (NEET) is an alarming signal that translating results in education into employment and other areas requires a more effective fight against discrimination. The review also identifies key priorities for Member States to address and ways to strengthen the EU Framework for NRIS.

  • Published: 2019-03-15
  • Corporate Author(s): Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers (European Commission)
  • Subject: access to education, anti-discriminatory measure, common strategy, equal treatment, ethnic discrimination, European social policy, integration of migrants, job access, poverty, racial discrimination, right to health, right to housing, rights of the individual, Roma, social integration
• 

  A comparative analysis of non-discrimination law in Europe 2017
  A comparative analysis of the implementation of EU gender equality law in the EU Member States, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Montenegro, Norway, Serbia and Turkey

  This report provides a general overview of the ways in which EU gender equality law has been implemented in the domestic laws of the 28 Member States of the European Union, as well as Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway (the EEA countries) and four candidate countries (the Former Yugoslav Republic...

  This report provides a general overview of the ways in which EU gender equality law has been implemented in the domestic laws of the 28 Member States of the European Union, as well as Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway (the EEA countries) and four candidate countries (the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey). The analysis is based on the country reports written by the gender equality law experts of the European equality law network (EELN). At the same time, this report explains the most important elements of the EU gender equality acquis. The term ‘EU gender equality acquis’ refers to all the relevant EU Treaty and EU Charter of Fundamental Rights provisions, legislation and the case law of the CJEU in relation to gender equality.

  • Published: 2019-02-25
  • Corporate Author(s): Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers (European Commission) ; European network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination
  • Subject: age discrimination, anti-discriminatory measure, application of EU law, comparative analysis, discrimination based on disability, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, ethnic discrimination, EU Member State, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Montenegro, Norway, racial discrimination, religious discrimination, report, Serbia, sexual discrimination, Turkey
• Intersecting inequalities
  Gender equality index

  • Published: 2019-03-04
  • Corporate Author(s): European Institute for Gender Equality (EU body or agency)
  • Subject: data collection, equal treatment, gender equality, racial discrimination, research method, rights of the individual, sexual discrimination
• 

  Second European Union minorities and discrimination survey
  Being black in the EU

  Almost 20 years after adoption of EU laws forbidding discrimination, people of African descent in the EU face widespread and entrenched prejudice and exclusion. Racial discrimination and harassment are commonplace. Experiences with racist violence vary greatly across countries, but reach as high...

  Almost 20 years after adoption of EU laws forbidding discrimination, people of African descent in the EU face widespread and entrenched prejudice and exclusion. Racial discrimination and harassment are commonplace. Experiences with racist violence vary greatly across countries, but reach as high as 14 %. Discriminatory profiling by the police, too, is a common reality. Hurdles to inclusion are multi-faceted, with many respondents facing discrimination during their job search and when looking for housing. These are just some of the findings presented in this report, which outlines selected results from FRA's second large-scale EU-wide survey on migrants and minorities (EU-MIDIS II). It examines the experiences of almost 6 000 people of African descent in 12 EU Member States. While the survey results paint a dire picture of reality on the ground, they can serve as an important resource for policymakers committed to promoting the full inclusion of people of African descent in the EU.

  • Published: 2018-11-28
  • Corporate Author(s): European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (EU body or agency)
  • Subject: anti-discriminatory measure, ethnic discrimination, EU Member State, racial discrimination, racism, rights of minorities, rights of the individual, social integration, social survey, violence, xenophobia
• 

  Experiences and perceptions of antisemitism
  Second survey on discrimination and hate crime against Jews in the EU

  This report outlines the main findings of FRA’s second survey on Jewish people’s experiences with hate crime, discrimination and antisemitism in the European Union – the biggest survey of Jewish people ever conducted worldwide. Covering 12 EU Member States, the survey reached almost 16,500 indiv...

  This report outlines the main findings of FRA’s second survey on Jewish people’s experiences with hate crime, discrimination and antisemitism in the European Union – the biggest survey of Jewish people ever conducted worldwide. Covering 12 EU Member States, the survey reached almost 16,500 individuals who identify as being Jewish. It follows up on the agency’s first survey, conducted in seven countries in 2012. The findings make for a sobering read. They underscore that antisemitism remains pervasive across the EU – and has, in many ways, become disturbingly normalised. The important information provided herein can support policymakers across the EU in stepping up their efforts to ensure the safety and dignity of all Jewish people living in the EU.

  • Published: 2019-01-23
  • Corporate Author(s): European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (EU body or agency)
  • Subject: anti-semitism, crime against individuals, Jew, racial discrimination, religious discrimination, rights of the individual, social survey, sociocultural group