By Keyword
Australia
Attorney-General (WA) v. Marquet, (November 13, 2003)
High Court of Australia
Keywords: Other
Brief Summary: Case involving the Constitutionality of proposed Electoral bills.
CEDAW: CEDAW cited in a footnote in reference to the tremendous progress made in the area of women's suffrage.
B (Infants) & B (Intervener) v. Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigineous Affairs, (June 19, 2003)
Family Court of Australia
Keywords: Other
Brief Summary: This case is an appeal from an order finding that the Family Court of Australia did not have jurisdiction to order the Minister of Immigration to release the Appellant's children from detention.
CEDAW: In dismissing the argument that Australia does not intend to implement the Convention on the Rights of the Child because the domestic laws prior to ratification were not in accord with the document, the Court noted the passage of the Sex Discrimination Act of 1984 after the ratification of CEDAW.
Royal Women's Hospital v. Medical Practitioners Board of Victoria, (April 20, 2006)
Federal Magistrates Court of Australia
Keywords: Other
Brief Summary: The hospital in question was the subject of an investigation pursuant to their treatment of patient "Ms X" who came to the hospital hysterical upon learning that her child would be born with skeletal dysplasia. Her hysterics and ongoing medical condition led the hospital to grant her an abortion at 32 weeks. The case at issue concerns whether or not patient confidentiality ought to entitle Royal Women's Hospital to withhold patient records in the absence of patient approval.
CEDAW: The hospital relied on CEDAW, stating that "although a lack of respect for the confidentiality of the patient medical information would be likely to affect both men and women, it might in particular deter women from seeking advice and treatment in relation to matters such as reproductive health and sexual or physical violence...a lack of confidentiality...would be likely to affect detrimentally the accessibility and acceptability of health services...which in turn would call into question whether health services would be available on a basis of equality between men and women as required by...CEDAW." The court rejected the hospital's argument on these grounds, finding that the actions of the Board were in no way discriminatory.
top↑
Canada
Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law v. Canada (Attorney General), (January 30, 2004)
Supreme Court
Keywords: Other
Brief Summary: The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal from a case challenging Section 43 of the Criminal Code justifying the use of reasonable force by parents and teachers by way of correction of child or pupil on the grounds that it constituted cruel and unusual treatment and punishment.
CEDAW: The Court held that the notion of "in the best interests of the child" was an established legal principle (as opposed to a policy consideration) in international and domestic law under the Convention on the Rights of the Child as well as CEDAW (to which Canada is a signatory).
top↑
Hong Kong
Ray Chen v. IBM China, (December 15, 2000)
Court
Keywords: Sexual Harassment; Other
Brief Summary: Petitioner, Ray Chen, was employed by IBM on a probationary basis. His employment was terminated by IBM claiming unsatisfactory performance. Chen filed a sexual harassment claim (after notice of his termination was given) with the EOC against a female superior at IBM. The present proceedings concern IBM's failure to pay Chen for over one year. Chen alleges that such failure is "victimization" under Hong Kong's SDO.
CEDAW: The question of law in this case centered on whether Chen, and others similarly situated, could claim protection under domestic law after the technical period of employment had terminated. Despite the fact that petitioner Chen was a man, the Court relied heavily on CEDAW Articles 11 and 13 in interpreting domestic Hong Kong law. Giving CEDAW due accord, the court held, "having regard to the general terms of CEDAW, and it purpose and intent, I am satisfied that its effect on the interpretation of the SDO is such that the SDO should be interpreted in such a way as to protect a woman from discrimination by an employer, in relation to that employment and the consequences of dismissal from the employment, even after the employment has terminated. To interpret the SDO in that way will be to give it a fair large and liberal interpretation and to remedy what otherwise would be a plain injustice."
top↑
New Zealand
Refugee Appeal No 71427/99, (August 16, 2000)
Refugee Status Appeals Authority
Keywords: Other
Brief Summary:Appellant, a citizen of Iran, applied for refugee status on the "grounds of religion, political opinion and membership of a particular social group." The question before the court was whether discrimination on these grounds constituted persecution.
CEDAW: CEDAW and other conventions were used as a means of defining discrimination and persecution. Additionally, the court recognizes that these conventions do "not permit social, cultural or religious practices in a country of origin from escaping assessment according to international human rights standards."
Mendelssohn v. Attorney-General, (May 4, 1999)
Court of Appeal, Wellington
Keywords: Discrimination-Religion; Other
Brief Summary: Case centered on a freedom of religion claim; the appellant claimed that his right to freedom of religion required an affirmative act of the part of the state. The Court held that it did not.
CEDAW: The court contrasted the freedom of religion with other rights (such as those contained in CEDAW). While human rights, such as those of equality afforded to women, required the state to take affirmative acts to effectuate those rights, the freedom of religion was premised on the state not taking action.
Full Text (LEXIS ONLY)
Quilter v. Attorney-General, (December 17, 1997)
Court of Appeal
Keywords:Discrimination-Sexual Orientation; Other
Brief Summary: Case alleged discrimination as concerns gay marriage; appellants complained that the Registrar refused to accept their notices of intended marriage. The Registrar claimed that the Marriage Act did not provide for same-sex marriage and the court agreed. The appellant appealed and the court ultimately dismissed.
CEDAW: The Court used CEDAW as a reference in oder to define "discrimination" and the legal obligations that result therefrom.
Full Text (LEXIS ONLY)
Northern Regional Health Authority v. Human Rights Commission, (July 9, 1997)
High Court, Auckland
Keywords: Other
Brief Summary: The case concerned a provision of the Health and Disability Services Act which discriminated against medical practitioners who had not received their training in New Zealand.
CEDAW:CEDAW is referenced by the court in its attempt to define discrimination.
Full Text (LEXIS ONLY)
Coburn v. Human Rights Commission, (June 3, 1994)
High Court, Auckland
Keywords: Discrimination-Gender/Sex, Marital Status; Other
Brief Summary: The court examined whether a particular retirement benefits scheme was discriminatory within the meaning of the Human Rights Act 1993.
CEDAW: CEDAW mentioned as relevant in determining the meaning of the Human Rights Act 1993.
Full Text (LEXIS ONLY)
top↑
South Africa
Kaunda and Others v. President of the RSA and Others (2), (August 4, 2004)
Constitutional Court
Keywords: Other
Brief Summary:Diplomatic Protection
CEDAW: The court acknowledges the importance of international law, and notes a number of international conventions which South Africa has ratified, including CEDAW.
In re: Certification of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, (September 6, 1996)
Constitutional Court
Keywords: Other
Brief Summary: This case involves the court's certification of the constitution. The court's duty, in this instance, is to make sure that the constitutional text adhere to the requirements of constitutional principles.
CEDAW: The court discusses the section of the constitution which dealt with marriage and family rights. The objection to the current text was the absence of any language which recognized the "family as the basic unit of society or else protecting the right freely to marry." CEDAW is mentioned in that it "emphasis[es] rights of free choice, equality and dignity in all matters relating to marriage and family relations." CEDAW is mentioned only as illustrative on this point, as are several other documents and constitutions.
top↑
United Kingdom
R (on the application of Hooper and Others) v. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, (February 14, 2002)
Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
Keywords: Discrimination-Gender/Sex; Other
Brief Summary:Case brought by widowers alleging discriminatory practices in government social security benefits; widowers were not permitted to receive the same benefits as widows from their deceased spouses.
CEDAW: The Court acknowledged that the UK was a party to CEDAW, an international agreement which recognized everyone's right to receive social security benefits.
R v. Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, (April 26, 2004)
Queen's Bench Division
Keywords: Discrimination-Gender/Sex; Sexual Orientation; Other
Brief Summary: Claim brought challenging certain provisions of the Employment Equality (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2003 which exempted organized religion from the prohibition on the grounds of sexual orientation.
CEDAW: CEDAW cited as an international agreement which recognized equality before the law.
R (on the application of Husan) v. The Secretary of State for the Home Department, (February 24, 2005)
Queen's Bench Division
Keywords: Other
Brief Summary: Asylum case with claimant from Bangladesh claiming that returning him to Bangladesh would violate his human rights.
CEDAW: CEDAW is discussed in relationship to Bangladesh's human rights record, in particular a CEDAW committee report which expressed concern over the government's ability to protect women from violence.
EM (Lebanon) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, (November 21, 2006)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Keywords: Discrimination-Gender/Sex; Other
Brief Summary: Claimant is appealing a removal decision following her asylum claim on the grounds that the return of claimant and her son to Lebanon would violate her right to family life.
CEDAW: Claimant uses the provisions of CEDAW to strenghten her human rights claim under English law. The court does not dispute the binding nature of the documents but finds that the evidence at hand does not rise to the level of a "complete violation" or nullity of claimant's human rights.
top↑
International Courts
Werner Mangold v. Rudiger Helm, (November 22, 2005)
European Court of Justice
Keywords: Other
Brief Summary: Contracts case involving age discrimination.
CEDAW: CEDAW was mentioned as an example of one of several international agreements that mandate equality before the law.
Hellmut Marschall v. Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, (May 15, 1997)
Court of Justice of the European Communities
Keywords: Discrimination-Gender/Sex, Employment; Other
Brief Summary: Discrimination action challenging a national law which mandated that women must be given priority over an equally qualified male candidates in official sectors where fewer women than men occupy high grade posts.
CEDAW: Several nations used CEDAW in order to support the action, specifically Article 4(1) which provdies for "special measures aimed at accelerating de facto equality between men and women." The court concurred.
Full Text
Webb v. Emp Air Cargo, (July 14, 1994)
Court of Justice of the European Communities
Keywords: Discrimination-Gender/Sex, Employment; Other
Brief Summary:Applicant was hired by the defendant corporation to replace a pregnant employee during her pregnancy leave. Applicant later learned that she, herself, was also pregnant; the Corporation then terminated her employment.
CEDAW: Applicant relies on CEDAW although the court never directly addresses how the Convention ought to be read in such an action.
Full Text
Unal Tekeli v. Turkey, (November 16, 2004)
European Court of Human Rights
Keywords: Discrimination-Gender/Sex; Other
Brief Summary: Applicant, a lawyer, petitioned the Karpiyaka Court of First Instance for permission to use only her maiden name (as she was professionally known by her maiden name, even after her marriage). She was denied and thereafter applied to the European Court of Human Rights alleging that the refusal to allow her to bear only her maiden name infered with her right to protection of her private life and discriminated against her on the basis of gender (as married men could continue to bear their own family name).
CEDAW: CEDAW is referred to as affirming "women's rights regarding the choice of family name and the possibility of keeping their own name if they so desire."
EFTA Surveillance Authority v. Kingdom of Norway, (January 24, 2003)
The EFTA Court
Keywords: Discrimination-Gender/Sex, Employment; Other
Brief Summary: Case concerned a challenge to the Norwegian Universities Act 1995 which allowed academic positions to be earmarked for women. The EFTA Surveillance Authority brought infringement proceedings against Norway alleging that the Act contravened the EC Equal Treatment Directive in that it discriminated against men on the grounds of sex.
CEDAW: In answer to the proceedings, Norway claimed that the under-representation of women in higher academic positions sustained a need for affirmative action measures such as are called for under Article 4(1) of CEDAW. The court disagreed, noting that the Directive was rendered after CEDAW came into force and the affirmative action measures in CEDAW are "clearly permissive rather than mandatory. Therefore they cannot be relied on for derogations from obligation under EEA law."
top↑