|
PARALLEL TEXTS
Le dichiarazioni omofobe del «patron» di una squadra di calcio professionistica possono far gravare su di essa l’onere di dimostrare che non segue una politica discriminatoria in materia di assunzioni
Inglese tratto da:
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_CJE-13-52_en.htm
Italiano tratto da:
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_CJE-13-52_it.htm
Data documento: 25-04-2013
1 |
Homophobic statements by the ‘patron’ of a professional football club may shift the burden of proof on to the club to prove that it does not have a discriminatory recruitment policy
|
Le dichiarazioni omofobe del «patron» di una squadra di calcio professionistica possono far gravare su di essa l’onere di dimostrare che non segue una politica discriminatoria in materia di assunzioni
|
2 |
The appearance of discrimination on ground of sexual orientation may be refuted by a body of consistent evidence
|
L’apparenza di discriminazione fondata sulle tendenze sessuali potrebbe essere confutata mediante una serie di indizi concordanti
|
3 |
The directive on equal treatment in employment and occupation lays down a general framework for combating discrimination on the grounds of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation as regards employment and occupation.
|
La direttiva sulla parità di trattamento in materia di occupazione e condizioni di lavoro stabilisce un quadro generale per la lotta alle discriminazioni fondate sulla religione o le convinzioni personali, gli handicap, l’età o le tendenze sessuali, per quanto concerne l’occupazione e le condizioni di lavoro.
|
4 |
Pursuant to that directive, where facts from which it may be presumed that there has been discrimination are established before a court or another competent authority, the burden of proof shifts to the defendants concerned who must prove that, notwithstanding the appearance of discrimination, there has been no breach of the principle of equal treatment.
|
A norma della direttiva, quando davanti all’autorità giudiziaria o ad altra autorità competente sono dimostrati fatti dai quali si può presumere che vi è stata una discriminazione, l’onere della prova incombe ai convenuti, che devono dimostrare che, nonostante tale apparenza di discriminazione, non si è verificata alcuna violazione del principio della parità di trattamento.
|
5 |
On 3 March 2010, Accept, a non-governmental organisation whose aim is to promote and protect lesbian, gay, bisexual and transsexual rights in Romania, lodged a complaint before the National Council for Combatting Discrimination (CNCD) against SC Fotbal Club Steaua
București
SA (‘FC Steaua’) and Mr Becali, who presents himself as being the ‘patron’ of that club.
|
Il 3 marzo 2010 l’Accept, un’organizzazione non governativa avente la finalità di promuovere e tutelare i diritti delle persone lesbiche, gay, bisessuali e transessuali in Romania, ha depositato una denuncia presso il Consiglio nazionale per la lotta alle discriminazioni («CNCD») nei confronti della squadra di calcio professionistica SC Fotbal Club Steaua
București
SA (l’«FC Steaua») e del sig. Becali, che si presentava come il «patron» di tale club.
|
6 |
Accept claims that the principle of equal treatment was breached in recruitment matters.
|
Essa lamentava che era stato violato il principio della parità di trattamento in materia di assunzioni.
|
7 |
In an interview concerning the possible transfer of a professional footballer, Mr Becali had stated essentially that he would never hire a homosexual player.
|
In effetti, in un'intervista sull'eventuale trasferimento di un calciatore professionista, il sig. Becali avrebbe dichiarato, in sostanza, che mai avrebbe ingaggiato uno sportivo omosessuale.
|
8 |
As regards the other defendant before the CNCD, FC Steaua, Accept maintains that the club has at no time distanced itself from Mr Becali’s statements.
|
Per quanto riguarda l'altra parte convenuta dinanzi al CNCD, ossia l’FC Steaua, l’Accept ha affermato che tale club non ha mai preso le distanze dalle dichiarazioni del sig. Becali.
|
9 |
The CNCD held, in particular, that since Mr Becali’s statements could not be regarded as emanating from an employer or a person responsible for recruitment, those circumstances did not fall within the sphere of employment.
|
Il CNCD ha considerato, in particolare, che tali circostanze non rientravano nell'ambito delle condizioni di lavoro e che le dichiarazioni del sig. Becali non potevano essere considerate provenienti da un datore di lavoro o da una persona incaricata delle assunzioni.
|
10 |
However, the CNCD took the view that those statements constituted discrimination in the form of harassment and gave Mr Becali a warning.
|
Tuttavia, il CNCD ha ritenuto che esse costituissero una discriminazione in forma di molestie ed ha sanzionato il sig. Becali con un ammonimento.
|
11 |
That penalty was the only one then possible under Romanian law, since the CNCD’s decision had been given more than six months after the date on which the facts complained of occurred.
|
Tale sanzione era l'unica possibile in quel momento ai sensi del diritto rumeno, poiché la decisione del CNCD era stata emanata più di sei mesi dopo i fatti censurati.
|
12 |
Accept brought an action against that decision before the Curtea de Apel
București
i (Court of Appeal, Bucharest, Romania), which referred questions for a preliminary ruling to the Court of Justice on the interpretation of the directive.
|
L’Accept ha impugnato tale decisione dinanzi alla Curtea de Apel
București
(Corte d'appello di Bucarest, Romania), che ha sottoposto alla Corte di giustizia talune questioni relative all'interpretazione della direttiva.
|
13 |
In today’s judgment, the Court observes that the directive applies to situations such as those on which the dispute in the main proceedings before the Curtea de Apel
București
is based, which involve statements concerning the conditions for access to employment, including recruitment conditions.
|
Nella sua odierna sentenza, la Corte rileva che la direttiva è applicabile in situazioni come quelle da cui è scaturita la controversia nel procedimento principale dinanzi alla Curtea de Apel
București, che riguardano dichiarazioni relative alle condizioni di accesso all'occupazione, comprese le condizioni di assunzione.
|
14 |
The Court states that the specificities of the recruitment of professional footballers are irrelevant in that regard because sport constitutes an economic activity which is covered by EU law.
|
La Corte sottolinea che, sotto questo profilo, le specificità dell'assunzione dei calciatori professionisti sono irrilevanti, in quanto l’esercizio dell'attività sportiva come attività economica rientra appieno nel diritto dell'Unione.
|
15 |
As regards the position of FC Steaua in the case in the main proceedings, the Court points out that the mere fact that statements such as Mr Becali’s do not come directly from a given defendant is not necessarily a bar to establishing, with respect to that defendant, the existence of ‘facts from which it may be presumed that there has been … discrimination’ within the meaning of the directive.
|
Per quanto attiene alla posizione dell’FC Steaua nel procedimento principale, la Corte precisa che la mera circostanza che dichiarazioni non provengano direttamente da una determinata parte convenuta non impedisce che si possa accertare, a carico di tale parte, l’esistenza di «fatti sulla base dei quali si può argomentare che sussiste discriminazione» ai sensi della direttiva.
|
16 |
Consequently, a defendant employer cannot deny the existence of facts from which it may be presumed that it has a discriminatory recruitment policy by asserting that the statements indicative of a homophobic recruitment policy come from a person who, while claiming to play an important role in the management of that employer and appearing to do so, is not legally capable of binding it in recruitment matters.
|
Pertanto, un datore di lavoro convenuto non può confutare l’esistenza di fatti che lasciano presumere che egli conduca una politica di assunzione discriminatoria limitandosi ad affermare che le dichiarazioni che suggeriscono l’esistenza di una politica di assunzioni omofoba provengono da una persona che, pur affermando di ricoprire un ruolo importante nella gestione di tale datore di lavoro, e pur sembrando rivestire tale ruolo, non è giuridicamente legittimata ad assumere decisioni che lo vincolino in materia di assunzioni.
|
17 |
According to the Court, the fact that that employer might not have clearly distanced itself from those statements may be taken into account in the appraisal of its recruitment policy.
|
Secondo la Corte, la circostanza che un tale datore di lavoro non abbia chiaramente preso le distanze da queste dichiarazioni può essere presa in considerazione in sede di valutazione della sua politica di assunzioni.
|
18 |
Furthermore, the Court states that the burden of proof, as modified by the directive, does not require evidence which is impossible to adduce without interfering with the right to privacy.
|
Peraltro, la Corte precisa che l’onere della prova, così come specificamente previsto dalla direttiva, non implica che la prova richiesta risulti impossibile da produrre senza ledere il diritto al rispetto della vita privata.
|
19 |
The appearance of discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation may be refuted with a body of consistent evidence, without the defendant having to prove that persons with a specific sexual orientation have been recruited in the past.
|
L’apparenza di discriminazione fondata sulle tendenze sessuali, infatti, potrebbe essere confutata mediante una serie di indizi concordanti, senza, tuttavia, che una parte convenuta debba dimostrare che in passato sono state assunte persone aventi una determinata tendenza sessuale.
|
20 |
That evidence may include, in particular, distancing itself from discriminatory public statements and the existence of express provisions in its recruitment policy aimed at ensuring compliance with the principle of equal treatment.
|
Tra tali indizi potrebbero annoverarsi, tra l’altro, una sua netta dissociazione rispetto alle dichiarazioni pubbliche discriminatorie, nonché l’esistenza di disposizioni espresse nella sua politica delle assunzioni dirette a garantire l’osservanza del principio della parità di trattamento.
|
21 |
Finally, the Court observes that the directive precludes national rules by virtue of which, where there is a finding of discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation, it is only possible to give a ‘warning’ after the expiry of six months from the date on which the facts occurred, if that penalty is not effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
|
Infine, la Corte rileva che la direttiva non tollera una normativa nazionale secondo cui, quando viene accertata una discriminazione fondata sulle tendenze sessuali, decorsi sei mesi dalla data dei fatti non è più possibile pronunciare altro che un «ammonimento», se siffatta sanzione non è effettiva, proporzionate e dissuasiva.
|
22 |
However, it is for the Romanian court to determine if that is the situation in the present case.
|
Spetta tuttavia al giudice rumeno valutare se ciò si verifichi nel caso di specie.
|
23 |
NOTE:
|
IMPORTANTE:
|
24 |
A reference for a preliminary ruling allows the courts and tribunals of the Member States, in disputes which have been brought before them, to refer questions to the Court of Justice about the interpretation of European Union law or the validity of a European Union act.
|
Il rinvio pregiudiziale consente ai giudici degli Stati membri, nell'ambito di una controversia della quale sono investiti, di interpellare la Corte in merito all’interpretazione del diritto dell’Unione o alla validità di un atto dell’Unione.
|
25 |
The Court of Justice does not decide the dispute itself.
|
La Corte non risolve la controversia nazionale.
|
26 |
It is for the national court or tribunal to dispose of the case in accordance with the Court’s decision, which is similarly binding on other national courts or tribunals before which a similar issue is raised.
|
Spetta al giudice nazionale risolvere la causa conformemente alla decisione della Corte.Tale decisione vincola egualmente gli altri giudici nazionali ai quali venga sottoposto un problema simile.
|
|
LISTEN WITH READSPEAKER
Homophobic statements by the ‘patron’ of a professional
football club may shift the burden of proof on to the club to prove that it does
not have a discriminatory recruitment policy
The appearance of discrimination on ground of sexual
orientation may be refuted by a body of consistent evidence
The directive on equal treatment in employment and occupation
lays down a general framework for combating discrimination on the grounds of
religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation as regards employment
and occupation.
Pursuant to that directive, where facts from which it may be
presumed that there has been discrimination are established before a court or
another competent authority, the burden of proof shifts to the defendants
concerned who must prove that, notwithstanding the appearance of discrimination,
there has been no breach of the principle of equal treatment.
On 3 March 2010, Accept, a non-governmental organisation whose
aim is to promote and protect lesbian, gay, bisexual and transsexual rights in
Romania, lodged a complaint before the National Council for Combatting
Discrimination (CNCD) against SC Fotbal Club Steaua
București SA (‘FC Steaua’) and
Mr Becali, who presents himself as being the ‘patron’ of that club.
Accept claims that the principle of equal treatment was
breached in recruitment matters.
In an interview concerning the possible transfer of a
professional footballer, Mr Becali had stated essentially that he would never
hire a homosexual player.
As regards the other defendant before the CNCD, FC Steaua,
Accept maintains that the club has at no time distanced itself from Mr Becali’s
statements.
The CNCD held, in particular, that since Mr Becali’s
statements could not be regarded as emanating from an employer or a person
responsible for recruitment, those circumstances did not fall within the sphere
of employment.
However, the CNCD took the view that those statements
constituted discrimination in the form of harassment and gave Mr Becali a
warning.
That penalty was the only one then possible under Romanian
law, since the CNCD’s decision had been given more than six months after the
date on which the facts complained of occurred.
Accept brought an action against that decision before the
Curtea de Apel București
(Court of Appeal, Bucharest, Romania), which referred
questions for a preliminary ruling to the Court of Justice on the interpretation
of the directive.
In today’s judgment, the Court observes that the directive
applies to situations such as those on which the dispute in the main proceedings
before the Curtea de Apel București
is based, which involve statements concerning the
conditions for access to employment, including recruitment conditions.
The Court states that the specificities of the recruitment of
professional footballers are irrelevant in that regard because sport constitutes
an economic activity which is covered by EU law.
As regards the position of FC Steaua in the case in the main
proceedings, the Court points out that the mere fact that statements such as Mr
Becali’s do not come directly from a given defendant is not necessarily a bar to
establishing, with respect to that defendant, the existence of ‘facts from which
it may be presumed that there has been … discrimination’ within the meaning of
the directive.
Consequently, a defendant employer cannot deny the existence
of facts from which it may be presumed that it has a discriminatory recruitment
policy by asserting that the statements indicative of a homophobic recruitment
policy come from a person who, while claiming to play an important role in the
management of that employer and appearing to do so, is not legally capable of
binding it in recruitment matters.
According to the Court, the fact that that employer might not
have clearly distanced itself from those statements may be taken into account in
the appraisal of its recruitment policy.
Furthermore, the Court states that the burden of proof, as
modified by the directive, does not require evidence which is impossible to
adduce without interfering with the right to privacy.
The appearance of discrimination on grounds of sexual
orientation may be refuted with a body of consistent evidence, without the
defendant having to prove that persons with a specific sexual orientation have
been recruited in the past.
That evidence may include, in particular, distancing itself
from discriminatory public statements and the existence of express provisions in
its recruitment policy aimed at ensuring compliance with the principle of equal
treatment.
Finally, the Court observes that the directive precludes
national rules by virtue of which, where there is a finding of discrimination on
grounds of sexual orientation, it is only possible to give a ‘warning’ after the
expiry of six months from the date on which the facts occurred, if that penalty
is not effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
However, it is for the Romanian court to determine if that is
the situation in the present case.
NOTE:
A reference for a preliminary ruling allows the courts and
tribunals of the Member States, in disputes which have been brought before them,
to refer questions to the Court of Justice about the interpretation of European
Union law or the validity of a European Union act.
The Court of Justice does not decide the dispute itself.
It is for the national court or tribunal to dispose of the
case in accordance with the Court’s decision, which is similarly binding on
other national courts or tribunals before which a similar issue is raised.
|