In 2012, Ariel T. walked in the first rank of Kraków’s Equality March, which came to the attention of his colleagues and line managers at work. On the same day, his boss sent him a text message: “You have a day off tomorrow. As from today you no longer work in our company. Sorry!”. Later on, T.’s managers sent him a series of derogative remarks concerning his sexual orientation and participation in the March. After six months his employment contract was terminated.
The Court held that Ariel T. had been fired for the sole reason that his employer, knowing about T.’s participation in the Equality March, considered him a member of a sexual minority. By doing so, the employer has engaged in discrimination based on sexual orientation. While awarding the compensation the court emphasised that Ariel T. had clearly sustained a financial loss. However, the court has denied an award of compensation for moral injury because Ariel T. refused to testify, which, in the court’s assessment, prevented determination of the extent of the moral injury suffered by the claimant.
“What’s crucial is that the court accepted that in this case direct discrimination had occurred by way of association; in other words, it was a situation where a person was treated in a less favourable way because of that person’s perceived affiliation with a given group even though no actual affiliation has taken place”, says Dorota Pudzianowska, Coordinator of the HFHR’s “Article 32” legal programme. “Moreover, this judgment was among the first decisions made under the Equality Act which implemented EU directives on equal treatment”, Dr Pudzianowska adds.
The Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights participated in the proceedings as a community organisation.
The judgment is not yet final.
