Best prices Special offers for members of the PWE book club The cheapest delivery
Prof. dr hab. Justyna Maliszewska-Nienartowicz
ORCID: 0000-0001-8266-3104

The head of the Department of European Studies at the Faculty of Political Science and Security Studies at Nicolaus Copernicus University, the author of about 130 publications on European Union law and several expert opinions prepared for the European Commission, the Polish Society of Anti-Discrimination Law, or the Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights, including those concerning discrimination and positive actions.

 
DOI: 10.33226/0032-6186.2024.3.2
JEL: J71, J83

The article analyses the Court of Justice case law to show its impact on the scope of application of the Council Directive 2000/78/EC. The study is based on the hypothesis that provisions of the directive concerning its scope are subject to broad and functional interpretation by the Court of Justice which contributes to developing EU antidiscrimination law. The most important in this respect are decisions regarding the delineation of 'the reference circle' for comparisons, which are carried out to determine whether discrimination has taken place, as well as those regarding subsequent elements listed in Article 3 paragraph 1 of Directive 2000/78. As a result, the article starts with the presentation of the directive's regulations. The next two sections contain an analysis of the Court of Justice case law considered essential for the topic, including decisions given in 2021–2023. Conclusions focus on the most important aspects of these judgments that may be helpful in the application of Polish legal provisions implementing Directive 2000/78.

Keywords: scope of Directive 2000/78; comparator; conditions for access to employment; conditions of dismissals and pay; Clinical Hospital of Dr. J. Babiński case; J.K. against TP S.A. case
DOI: 10.33226/0032-6186.2022.11.4
JEL: J71, J83

The article contains the analysis of EU standards for reasonable accommodation and tries to clarify their nature, scope and main types. Two hypotheses have been formulated in the research process. Firstly, both the legal provisions and the case law of the CJEU recognise that the concept of reasonable accommodation should be broad and flexible at the same time and treat it as important instrument for ensuring substantive equality of the workers with disabilities. Secondly, despite EU regulations on reasonable accommodation, employers do not always fulfill their obligation in a way that takes into account the individual needs of the people with disabilities. Consequently, the first part of the article concentrates on the EU legal framework for the obligation of reasonable accommodation, taking into account the sources of primary and secondary law and their mutual relations. Then, the most important decisions of the CJEU concerning this concept are presented, including those given in 2021-2022. The last part of the article focuses on the assessment of the legal nature and scope of reasonable accommodation, as well as identifies their common types and examples.

Keywords: disability; reasonable accommodation; disproportionate burden; Tartu Vangla case; HR Rail SA case