DH v Czech Republic
The disproportionate placement of Roma children in special schools for children with learning difficulties was indirect discrimination, which could be shown by statistics without proof of discriminatory intent.
Facts
Eighteen Roma children from the Czech city of Ostrava were placed in special schools for children with learning difficulties, where they received a more limited education, after psychological tests which they argued were not adapted to Roma children. Statistics showed that Roma children were many times more likely to be placed in special schools than non Roma children. They claimed that this was discrimination in the enjoyment of the right to education.
Legal principle
The Grand Chamber held that there had been a violation of article 14, read with article 2 of Protocol No 1. The court said that a difference in treatment may take the form of disproportionately prejudicial effects of a general policy or measure which, though couched in neutral terms, discriminates against a group, and that such indirect discrimination does not require discriminatory intent. Statistics may be relied on to establish a prima facie case, and the burden then shifts to the state to show that the difference was justified. The tests were not shown to be adapted to Roma children, and parental consent to the placements could not be regarded as a waiver of the right not to be discriminated against.
Related cases on discrimination, property, education and elections (article 14 and the Protocols)
- Ali v Head Teacher and Governors of Lord Grey School [2006] UKHL 14, [2006] 2 AC 363
- Belgian Linguistic Case (No 2) (1979) 1 EHRR 252
- Burden v United Kingdom (2008) 47 EHRR 38
- Hirst v United Kingdom (No 2) (2006) 42 EHRR 41
- JA Pye (Oxford) Ltd v United Kingdom (2008) 46 EHRR 45
- James v United Kingdom (1986) 8 EHRR 123
- Mathieu-Mohin and Clerfayt v Belgium (1988) 10 EHRR 1
- Moohan v Lord Advocate [2014] UKSC 67, [2015] AC 901
Studying human rights law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
