FredmanSandra, ‘Changing the Norm: Postive Duties in Equal Treatment Legislation’ (2005) 12(4) Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law369.
3.
401 US 424 (1971).
4.
Burden of Proof Directive 97/80/EC, art 4(1); Racial Equality Directive 2000/43/EC, art 8.
5.
(UK) ss 9, 136.
6.
Northern Ireland Act 1998 (UK) s 75, sch 9.
7.
MacphersonWilliamSir, The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry: Report of an Inquiry by Sir William Macpherson of Cluny (1999).
8.
Race Relations Act 1976 (UK) s 71.
9.
Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (UK) ss 49A, 49D; Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (UK) ss 76A, 76B, 76C.
10.
Equality Act 2010 (UK) s 149(7).
11.
Northern Ireland Act 1998 (UK) s 75(1).
12.
Equality Act 2010 (UK) s 149(1).
13.
Northern Ireland Act 1998 (UK) sch 9, ss 2, 4.
14.
Northern Ireland Act 1998 (UK) schs 9, 6(1).
15.
Northern Ireland Act 1998 (UK) sch 9, s 5.
16.
O'CinneideColm, ‘Beyond the Limits of Equal Treatment: The Use of Positive Duties in Equality Law’ (Paper presented at Mainstreaming Equality: Models for a Statutory Duty Conference, Dublin, Ireland, 27 February 2003).
17.
Northern Ireland Act 1998 (UK) ss 1, 11, 75, sch 9; Equality Act 2006 (UK) ss 31(1), 32.
18.
R (on the application of Elias) v Secretary of State for Defence [2005] IRLR 788.
19.
O'CinneideColm, ‘Positive Duties and Gender Equality’ (2005) 8(1) International Journal of Discrimination and the Law91, 101–3.
20.
FredmanSandra, ‘Equality: A New Generation?’ (2001) 30(2) Industrial Law Journal145, 164.
21.
Employment Equity Act, SC 1995, c 44.
22.
There are also complementary provincial human rights laws.
23.
Ontario Human Rights Commission and O'Malley v Simpsons-Sears Ltd [1985] 2 SCR 536; Bhinder v Canadian National Railway Co [1985] 2 SCR 561.
JusticeMadamMcLachlinBeverley‘Reasonable Accommodation in a Multicultural Society’ (Address delivered to the Canadian Bar Association CLE Committee & National Constitutional and Human Rights Section, Calgary, Canada, 7 April 1995).
27.
British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v BCGSEU [1999] 3 SCR 3 (‘Meiorin’).
28.
Meiorin [1999] 3 SCR 3 [27]–[29].
29.
See British Columbia (Inspector of Motor Vehicles) v British Columbia (Council of Human Rights) [1999] 3 SCR 868 (commonly known as Grismer).
30.
Meiorin [1999] 3 SCR 3 [54].
31.
Canadian Human Rights ActRSC1985, c H–6, s 53.
32.
See, eg, Purvis v New South Wales (Department of Education and Training) (2003) 217 CLR 92; SmithBelinda, ‘From Wardley to Purvis: How Far Has Australian Anti-Discrimination Law Come in 30 Years?’ (2008) 21(1) Australian Journal of Labour Law3.
33.
Some state Acts and the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) provide exceptions.
34.
Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336.
35.
See HunyorJonathon, ‘Skin-Deep: Proof and Inferences of Racial Discrimination in Employment’ (2003) 25Sydney Law Review537.
36.
See SturmSusan, ‘Second Generation Employment Discrimination: A Structural Approach’ (2001) 101Columbia Law Review458, 475–476.
37.
There is some scope for class actions, but these provisions are not well used.
38.
On the reasons parties choose to settle, see further GazeBeth & HunterRosemary, Enforcing Human Rights: An evaluation of the new regime (Themis Press, 2010) ch 8 & 9; AllenDominique, ‘Behind the Conciliation Doors: Settling Discrimination Complaints in Victoria’ (2009) 18(3) Griffith Law Review778.
39.
See, eg, Equal Opportunity Act 2011 (Vic); AllenDominique, ‘Victoria Paves the Way to Eliminating Discrimination’ (2010) 23(4) Australian Journal of Labour Law318.
40.
At the time of writing, the Attorney-General had issued a Discussion Paper on the consolidation of Commonwealth anti-discrimination laws and a Bill is expected in 2012. However, it is unclear whether the resulting Bill will reform the model in the way we have suggested or merely restate the laws.
41.
The Equal Rights Trust (UK), The Declaration of Principles on Equality (2008).