Personal and material scope
Author | Justesen, Pia |
Pages | 36-50 |
36
3 PERSONAL AND MATERIAL SCOPE
3.1 Personal scope
3.1.1 EU a nd non -EU nat ionals (Recit al 13 and Article 3(2), Directive 2000/43
and Recital 12 and Article 3(2), Directive 2000/78)
In Denmark, there are no residence or citizenship/nationality requirements for protection
under the relevant national laws transposing the directives. Undocumented migrants and
those with irregular status are therefore protected by the Danish anti-discrimination laws.
3.1.2 Natural and legal persons (Recital 16, Directive 2000/43 )
a) Protection against discrimination
In Denmark, the personal scope of anti-discrimination law does not cover legal persons
for the purpose of protection against discrimination. Only natural persons are protected
against direct and indirect discrimination.
In the labour market, it follows from Sections 2 and 3 of the Act on the Prohibition of
Discrimination in the Labour Market etc., which specifically mentions employees and job
applicants. Outside the labour market, it follows from Section 3 of the Act on Equal
Treatment and from Section 5 of the Act on the Prohibition of Discrimination due to
Disability that individuals are protected against discrimination on account of their race,
ethnic origin and disability.
b) Liability for discrimination
In Denmark, the personal scope of anti-discrimination law covers natural and legal
persons for the purpose of liability for discrimination.
There is no distinction in Section 2 of the Act on the Prohibition of Discrimination in the
Labour Market etc. between different kinds of employers when it comes to liability for
discrimination in the labour market. According to the general Danish labour law concept
of employers, both natural and legal persons may be liable for discrimination as
employers. The liability covers an even broader group of legal persons than the
traditional Danish labour market concept of employers. Thus, Section 3 of the Act on the
Prohibition of Discrimination in the Labour Market etc. stipulates that the prohibition of
discrimination applies to anybody who runs vocational trainin g and assigns employment,
who issues decisions on access to self-employment and who issues decisions on
membership and benefits provided by trade unions or employers’ associations.
A 2019 decision by the Board of Equal Treatment illustrates the obligatio n to provide
reasonable accommodation in access to employment and how that applies to anybody
assigning employment.99 In the case, the complainant was a job-seeking man who
argued that he had experienced discrimination because of disability. The complainant had
dyslexia and was therefore unable to use the computers at the local municipality job
centre. The available computers did not have a dyslexia IT program installed. The job
centre had told the complainant that he could use the computers at the library. There
was, however, no agreement between the job centre and the library on the counselling of
jobseekers. The Board found that the complainant’s dyslexia constituted a disability
covered by the Act. The Board argued that individuals with reading difficulties in the
municipality in question did not have access to the relevant IT equipment for carrying out
job searches. This group of individuals therefore had a disadvantage in comparison with
other individuals regarding job seeking. The Board found that by referring the
99 Board of Equal Treatment, Decision No. 9872 of 25 September 2019.
To continue reading
Request your trial