直接歧视与间接歧视:有区别的区别

A. Yu
{"title":"直接歧视与间接歧视:有区别的区别","authors":"A. Yu","doi":"10.5206/UWOJLS.V9I2.8072","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since Meiorin, it can be tempting to think that in Canadian law, the distinction between direct discrimination and indirect discrimination is now a distinction without a difference. The same analytical framework applies to both kinds of discrimination, and both can yield liability, so one might think that focusing on the distinction pointlessly distracts from the substantive concerns of discrimination law. However, I take a different view. In the context of Canadian human rights codes, the distinction remains significant. Despite attempts to abandon the distinction, the distinction seems to hold intuitive appeal and carries practical benefits. I submit that it is a distinction with a difference: it encourages adjudicators to consider more carefully discrimination without discriminatory intent, thus identifying cases of genuine discrimination they might otherwise miss.","PeriodicalId":40917,"journal":{"name":"Western Journal of Legal Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Direct Discrimination and Indirect Discrimination: A Distinction with a Difference\",\"authors\":\"A. Yu\",\"doi\":\"10.5206/UWOJLS.V9I2.8072\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Since Meiorin, it can be tempting to think that in Canadian law, the distinction between direct discrimination and indirect discrimination is now a distinction without a difference. The same analytical framework applies to both kinds of discrimination, and both can yield liability, so one might think that focusing on the distinction pointlessly distracts from the substantive concerns of discrimination law. However, I take a different view. In the context of Canadian human rights codes, the distinction remains significant. Despite attempts to abandon the distinction, the distinction seems to hold intuitive appeal and carries practical benefits. I submit that it is a distinction with a difference: it encourages adjudicators to consider more carefully discrimination without discriminatory intent, thus identifying cases of genuine discrimination they might otherwise miss.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40917,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Western Journal of Legal Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Western Journal of Legal Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5206/UWOJLS.V9I2.8072\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Western Journal of Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5206/UWOJLS.V9I2.8072","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

自从Meiorin以来,人们很容易认为,在加拿大法律中,直接歧视和间接歧视之间的区别现在是没有区别的区别。同样的分析框架适用于这两种歧视,两者都可能产生责任,因此人们可能会认为,毫无意义地关注这种区别会分散对歧视法实质性问题的关注。然而,我持不同看法。在加拿大人权法的背景下,这种区别仍然很明显。尽管有人试图放弃这种区别,但这种区别似乎具有直观的吸引力,并带来了实际的好处。我认为,这是一个有区别的区别:它鼓励裁决者在没有歧视意图的情况下更仔细地考虑歧视,从而确定他们可能遗漏的真正歧视案件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Direct Discrimination and Indirect Discrimination: A Distinction with a Difference
Since Meiorin, it can be tempting to think that in Canadian law, the distinction between direct discrimination and indirect discrimination is now a distinction without a difference. The same analytical framework applies to both kinds of discrimination, and both can yield liability, so one might think that focusing on the distinction pointlessly distracts from the substantive concerns of discrimination law. However, I take a different view. In the context of Canadian human rights codes, the distinction remains significant. Despite attempts to abandon the distinction, the distinction seems to hold intuitive appeal and carries practical benefits. I submit that it is a distinction with a difference: it encourages adjudicators to consider more carefully discrimination without discriminatory intent, thus identifying cases of genuine discrimination they might otherwise miss.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
期刊最新文献
A New Dawn for Canadian Platform Workers? To Affirm Difference or To Deny Distinction? A New Dawn for Canadian Platform Workers? To Affirm Difference or To Deny Distinction? Deductibility of Surrogacy Payments in Canadian Tax Law
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1