CJEU Case C-38/24 / Judgment

G.L. v AB SpA
Deciding body type
Court of Justice of the European Union
Type
Decision
Decision date
11/09/2025
ECLI (European case law identifier)
ECLI:EU:C:2025:690
  • CJEU Case C-38/24 / Judgment

    Key facts of the case:

    Reference for a preliminary ruling – Social policy – United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities – Articles 2, 5 and 7 – Articles 21, 24 and 26 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Directive 2000/78/EC – Equal treatment in employment and occupation – Article 1 – Article 2(1) and (2)(b) – Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of disability – Indirect discrimination – Difference of treatment in respect of an employee who does not himself or herself have a disability but cares for his or her child who has a disability – Article 5 – Employer’s obligation to make reasonable accommodation

    Outcome of the case:

    On those grounds, the Court (First Chamber) hereby rules:

    1. Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation and, in particular, Article 1 and Article 2(1) and (2)(b), read in the light of Articles 21, 24 and 26 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Articles 2, 5 and 7 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, concluded in New York on 13 December 2006 and approved on behalf of the European Community by Council Decision 2010/48/EC of 26 November 2009,

      must be interpreted as meaning that the prohibition of indirect discrimination on grounds of disability applies to an employee who does not himself or herself have a disability but who is subject to such discrimination because of the assistance that that person provides to his or her child who has a disability, which enables that child to receive the primary care required by virtue of his or her condition.

    2. Directive 2000/78 and, in particular, Article 5 thereof, read in the light of Articles 24 and 26 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 2 and Article 7(1) of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities,

      must be interpreted as meaning that an employer is required, in order to ensure compliance with the principle of equal treatment of workers and the prohibition of indirect discrimination referred to in Article 2(2)(b) of that directive, to make reasonable accommodation, within the meaning of Article 5 of that directive, in respect of an employee who does not himself or herself have a disability but who provides, to his or her child who has a disability, the assistance which enables that child to receive the primary care required by virtue of his or her condition, provided that that accommodation does not impose an unreasonable burden on that employer.

     

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter

    40. By its first question, the referring court asks, in essence, whether Directive 2000/78 and, in particular, Article 1 and Article 2(1) and (2)(b) thereof, read in the light of Articles 21, 24 and 26 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) and Articles 2, 5 and 7 of the UN Convention, must be interpreted as meaning that the prohibition of indirect discrimination on grounds of disability applies to an employee who does not himself or herself have a disability but who is subject to such discrimination because of the assistance that that person provides to his or her child who has a disability, which enables that child to receive the primary care required by virtue of his or her condition.

    ...

    45. In order to answer the first question, it should be recalled that Directive 2000/78 is a specific expression, within the field that it covers, of the general principle of non-discrimination laid down in Article 21 of the Charter, which prohibits any discrimination on grounds, inter alia, of disability (see, to that effect, judgment of 21 October 2021, Komisia za zashtita ot diskriminatsia, C‑824/19, EU:C:2021:862, paragraph 32 and the case-law cited). As regards the situation at issue in the main proceedings, it is also necessary to take into account, in the context of the examination of that first question, the rights of the child and of persons with disabilities enshrined respectively in Articles 24 and 26 of the Charter.

    46. Moreover, the European Union has approved the UN Convention, the provisions of which are therefore, from the time of that convention’s entry into force, an integral part of the EU legal order. It follows that those provisions may, like those of the Charter, be relied on in order to interpret the provisions of Directive 2000/78 and that the latter must, as far as possible, be interpreted in a manner that is consistent with that convention (see, to that effect, judgments of 11 April 2013, HK Danmark, C‑335/11 and C‑337/11, EU:C:2013:222, paragraphs 30 to 32, and of 18 January 2024, Ca Na Negreta, C‑631/22, EU:C:2024:53, paragraph 41).

    47. As is apparent from paragraphs 27 to 31 above, the referring court seeks to ascertain, in essence, whether Directive 2000/78, read in the light of Articles 21, 24 and 26 of the Charter and Articles 2 and 5 of the UN Convention, also applies to indirect discrimination ‘by association’ on grounds of disability, as regards an employee who cares for his or her child who has a disability.

    ...

    57. Third, for the purposes of an interpretation of the prohibition of discrimination that complies with the Charter, it must be noted that, as is apparent from the wording of Article 21(1) of the Charter, the general principle of non-discrimination that it lays down prohibits ‘any discrimination’ based, inter alia, on disability, ensuring therefore a broad application of that fundamental guarantee.

    58. The prohibition of discrimination laid down in Article 2(2)(b) of Directive 2000/78 must also be interpreted in the light of Articles 24 and 26 of the Charter. Article 24, concerning the rights of the child, provides, in paragraph 1 thereof, that children are to have the right to such protection and care as is necessary for their well-being and, in paragraph 2, that in all actions relating to children, whether taken by public authorities or private institutions, the child’s best interests must be a primary consideration. As regards Article 26 of the Charter, it provides that the European Union is to recognise and respect the right of persons with disabilities to benefit from measures designed to ensure their independence, social and occupational integration and participation in the life of the community (see, to that effect, judgment of 18 January 2024, Ca Na Negreta, C‑631/22, EU:C:2024:53, paragraph 40 and the case-law cited).

    59. In addition, Article 21(1) of the Charter contains, at the very least, the same guarantees as those provided for in Article 14 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, signed in Rome on 4 November 1950, and is applicable in conjunction with the rights and freedoms guaranteed by that convention, which must be taken into account by virtue of Article 52(3) of the Charter as a minimum threshold of protection (see, by analogy, judgment of 3 April 2025, Alchaster II, C‑743/24, EU:C:2025:230, paragraph 24).

    ...

    60. It follows from the foregoing therefore that the principle of non-discrimination laid down in Article 21(1) of the Charter and given concrete expression by Directive 2000/78 also covers indirect discrimination ‘by association’ on grounds of disability

    61. In the light of all the foregoing considerations, the answer to the first question is that Directive 2000/78 and, in particular, Article 1 and Article 2(1) and (2)(b) thereof, read in the light of Articles 21, 24 and 26 of the Charter and Articles 2, 5 and 7 of the UN Convention, must be interpreted as meaning that the prohibition of indirect discrimination on grounds of disability applies to an employee who does not himself or herself have a disability but who is subject to such discrimination because of the assistance that that person provides to his or her child who has a disability, which enables that child to receive the primary care required by virtue of his or her condition.

    62. By its second question, the referring court asks, in essence, whether, in the event that the first question is answered in the affirmative, Directive 2000/78 and, in particular, Article 5 thereof, read in the light of Articles 24 and 26 of the Charter and Article 2 and Article 7 of the UN Convention, must be interpreted as meaning that an employer is required, in order to ensure compliance with the principle of equal treatment of workers and the prohibition of indirect discrimination referred to in Article 2(2)(b) of that directive, to make reasonable accommodation, within the meaning of Article 5 of that directive, in respect of an employee who does not himself or herself have a disability but who provides, to his or her child who has a disability, the assistance which enables that child to receive the primary care required by virtue of his or her condition.

    ...

    70. However, in the case giving rise to that judgment, the request for a preliminary ruling did not concern the scope of that article nor whether, as in the present case, in order to ensure compliance with the principle of the equal treatment of workers and the prohibition on indirect discrimination referred to in Article 2(2)(b) of Directive 2000/78, reasonable accommodation, within the meaning of Article 5 thereof, must be put in place in respect of an employee who does not himself or herself have a disability, but who cares for his or her child who has a disability. Furthermore, on the date on which the judgment was delivered, the Charter and the UN Convention, in the light of which Directive 2000/78 must be interpreted, had not yet, respectively, entered into force or been approved by the Community.

    71. Consequently, with a view to the interpretation of Article 5 of Directive 2000/78 in conformity with the Charter, it should, first, be borne in mind, as stated in paragraph 58 above, that Articles 24 and 26 of the Charter provide, inter alia, respectively, that children are to have the right to such protection and care as is necessary for their well-being and that the European Union is to recognise and respect the right of persons with disabilities to benefit from measures designed to ensure their independence, social and occupational integration and participation in the life of the community.

    ...

    76. It follows from the foregoing that an employer is required to provide reasonable accommodation, within the meaning of Article 5 of Directive 2000/78, read in the light of Articles 24 and 26 of the Charter and Article 2 and Article 7(1) of the UN Convention, as regards such an employee.

    ...

    80. In the light of the foregoing, the answer to the second question is that Directive 2000/78 and, in particular, Article 5 thereof, read in the light of Articles 24 and 26 of the Charter and Article 2 and Article 7(1) of the UN Convention, must be interpreted as meaning that an employer is required, in order to ensure compliance with the principle of equal treatment of workers and the prohibition of indirect discrimination referred to in Article 2(2)(b) of that directive, to make reasonable accommodation, within the meaning of Article 5 of that directive, in respect of an employee who does not himself or herself have a disability but who provides, to his or her child who has a disability, the assistance which enables that child to receive the primary care required by virtue of his or her condition, provided that that accommodation does not impose an unreasonable burden on that employer.

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter (original language)