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.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.