Women and Justice: Keywords

Legislation

Algemene wet gelijke behandeling (Equal Treatment Act) (2005)

Employment discrimination, Gender discrimination, LGBTIQ

This Act prohibits both direct and indirect discrimination between men and women. Direct discrimination includes discrimination based on pregnancy, childbirth, or motherhood, and indirect discrimination is based other characteristics that result in sex discrimination. The Act covers discrimination in employment, equal pay and pension schemes, and excludes discrimination aimed at placing women in a privileged position or occupations in which sex is a determining factor because of the nature of the occupation in question.

Domestic Case Law

Christian Youth Camps Ltd. v. Cobaw Community Health Service Ltd Supreme Court of Victoria Court of Appeal (2014)

Gender discrimination, LGBTIQ

This decision concerned the appeal by Christian Youth Camps (“CYC”) against the decision of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (“VCAT”) that CYC had unlawfully discriminated against Cobaw, an organisation concerned with youth suicide prevention. CYC, the operator of a camping facility at Phillip Island, had been established by the Christian Brethren Church and was opposed to homosexual activity on religious grounds. Cobaw had sought to rent CYC’s camping resort for the purposes of a weekend camp to be attended by homosexual young people. CYC had refused Cobaw’s request for accommodation. VCAT found that by refusing to accommodate Cobaw, CYC had unlawfully discriminated on the basis of sexual orientation in the provision of accommodation or services. CYC asserted that its refusal to accommodate the youths was necessary to comply with its religious beliefs or principles, and sought to invoke the religious exemption in sections 75(2) and 77 of the Equal Opportunity Act 1995 (Vic). VCAT found that CYC could not rely on the religious exemption as they were not a body established for religious purposes. While CYC had been established by the Christian Brethren Church, VCAT found that the CYC’s purposes and activities were not religious. The Court of Appeal dismissed CYC’s appeal and upheld VCAT’s decision. The Court of Appeal affirmed VCAT’s finding that the refusal to accommodate was made in the course of the conduct of a secular and commercial accommodation business. The Court of Appeal also upheld VCAT’s finding that CYC’s opposition to homosexual activity was a “rule of private morality,” which “carried with it no obligation to convince others to adopt the same rule.”