• in 2006 Samira Achbita was fired for not respecting the internal standard from the company banning to wear religious clothing.
  • the worker was hired by The GS4 company, which provides services to the public and private sectors.
  • according to European legislation, the principle of equality will not allow any kind of direct or indirect discrimination.
  • poll: is it fair to ban the wearing of the Islamic veil at work?


the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) veiled has estimated Tuesday that it is not discriminatory to a private company prohibits employees wear the veil Islamic or visible use of any political, philosophical or religious signs.

the highest judicial body of the European Union (EU) considered that an internal standard in that sense Yes could be discriminatory if it causes “a particular disadvantage those who profess a religion or have certain convictions,” said in a statement.

the European Court of Justice is thus pronounced in response to a query by the Court of Cassation of Belgium in the case of a woman who was fired for not respecting the internal standard of your company that prohibited wear religious garments to maintain “neutrality” in the face to customers.

the applicant in question, Samira Achbita was hired in 2003 as a receptionist by The GS4 company, which provides services to the public and private sector.

in April 2006, Achbita informed the company of his intention of wearing Islamic headscarf at work the firm said that would not tolerate the use of such clothing because “hold political, philosophical or religious signs was contrary to the neutrality that the company had imposed to follow in relations with clients”.

after a period of sick, the employee re-joined his work on 15 May and announced he would cover with the Islamic headscarf, which the company reacted by modifying the rules to expressly forbid such attire.

the exempleada, after being dismissed, appealed to justice Belgian, who moved the issue to the Court of Justice of the EU to establish whether that decision constitutes direct discrimination.

according to the European legislation, reminded the Court, the “principle of equality” not allow any discrimination direct or indirect based, among others, on religious grounds.

However, the ECJ pointed out that it is possible that the Belgian Court considers that it does if it is credited to “obligation apparently neutral” does, in fact, a “disadvantage those who profess a religion or have certain convictions”.

added that corresponds to the Belgian national judge check whether GS4 had, prior to the dismissal of the worker, set a “general scheme differentiated matter” .

the national court must also contrast GS4 had no choice but to dismiss the employee whether, on the contrary, could have offered another job which not forced him to be in “visual contact” with clients.