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.