Some are More Equal than Others: the Decision of the Court of Justice in Grant v. South-West Trains

Abstract

InPv.Sthe Court of Justice sent out a strong message that it was keen to protect the rights of minorities. Ruling that the Equal Treatment Directive 76/207 applies to the gender reassignment of the person concerned, the Court gave protection to P, a male to female transsexual. To justify its decision the Court said “[to] tolerate such discrimination [against transsexuals] would be tantamount, as regards such a person, to a failure to respect the dignity and freedom to which he or she is entitled, and which the Court has a duty to safeguard”. Its genuine commitment to safeguarding such rights was put to the test inGrant, when faced by the claim of a lesbian for concessionary rail travel for her partner under Article 141 (Article 119) EC on equal pay.

A Legal Perspective on Sexuality and Organization: A Lesbian and Gay Case Study

“…The European Court of Justice took a similar approach in assessing the staff travel policy of a British train operator ( Grant v. South West Trains case C‐249/96 [1998] ECR, I‐621, discussed in Armstrong [1998]; Bell [1999]; Barnard [1999]). The employer refused concessionary rail travel for the same‐sex partner of an employee, whereas an opposite‐sex partner (married or not) was so entitled.…”