Equality and Non-discrimination

Primary tabs

Caselaw

Entre el 27 de diciembre de 1995 y el 30 de septiembre de 1999, la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (CIDH) recibió innumerables peticiones de personas jubiladas y de varias organizaciones no gubernamentales en las que se denunciaba la violación de los derechos a un recurso judicial efectivo, al debido proceso legal, a la propiedad, a la seguridad social, a la salud, al bienestar y a la igualdad ante la ley, previstos en la Declaración Americana de Derechos y Deberes del Hombre (DADH) y en la Convención Americana sobre Derechos Humanos (CADH).

La Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (CIDH) recibió una petición en favor de las niñas Dilcia Yean y Violeta Bosica contra la República Dominicana por haber negado la nacionalidad a las niñas a pesar de haber nacido en ese territorio. Los peticionarios señalaron que debido a la falta de reconocimiento de la nacionalidad, las niñas estaban expuestas al peligro inminente de ser expulsadas del país y que no podían ingresar a la escuela por carecer de un documento de identificación.

The appellant Irma Sparks, a single black mother with two children relied on social assistance and had lived in public housing for ten years. She was given one month's notice that she would be evicted with no reason given. Public housing was exempted from the security of tenure provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act.  Sparks alleged the legislation discriminated on the enumerated ground of race and sex and on the “analogous” grounds of marital/family status (single mothers) and poverty/income.

Regulations entitled those on social security benefits to receipt of a winter fuel payment for.  The payment was available to women aged 60 and over and men aged 65 and over. Mr Taylor was 62 and brought a complaint on the basis that the regulation did not comply with the European Union Council Directive on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security. The High Court referred the interpretation of the Directive to the European Court of Justice (ECJ).  

In 1994 the Agriculture Labour Relations Act (ALRA) was passed to include agricultural workers in the Province of Ontario's labour relations regime.  One year later a newly elected Conservative government repealed the ALRA.  The Appellants challenged both the repeal of the ALRA and the exclusion of agricultural workers from the Labour Relations Act (LRA) as an infringement of the rights of agricultural workers to associate under section 2(d) of the Canadian Charter.  They also alleged discrimination against a vulnerable class of workers, in violation of the right to equali

The applicants alleged, amongst other things, that the legislative regime in The Gambia for mental health patients violated the right to enjoy the best attainable state of physical and mental health (Article 16) and the right of the disabled to special measures of protection in keeping with their physical and moral needs (Article 18(4)).  Both rights are guaranteed in the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.    

 The case concerned a resolution adopted by the Dobšiná municipal council, under pressure from right‑wing anti‑Roma groups, to cancel a previous resolution in which the council had approved a plan to construct low‑cost social housing for Roma inhabitants living in very poor conditions. The petitioners contended, amongst other things, that the State party had failed to safeguard their right to adequate housing, thereby violating Article 5(e)(iii) of the International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD).  

Five joined communications alleged the existence of slavery and analogous practices in Mauritania and of institutionalized racial discrimination perpetrated by the ruling Moor community against the more populous black community. It was alleged, amongst other things, that black Mauritanians were enslaved, routinely evicted or displaced from their lands, which were then confiscated by the government along with their livestock.  It also was alleged that black Mauritanians were denied access to employment and were subjected to tedious and unremunerated work.

The applicants were permanent residents in South Africa. They challenged legislative provisions, which limited entitlement to social grants for the aged to South African citizens, and would prevent children of non-South African citizens in the same position as the applicants from claiming any of the childcare grants available to South African children (regardless of the citizenship-status of the children themselves).  

The Texas Constitution declares that “a general diffusion of knowledge” is “essential to the preservation of the liberties and rights of the people”. Further, the Legislature and State have a duty “to establish and make suitable provision for the support and maintenance of an efficient system of free schools” (Article VII § 1). Here, the Petitioners sought a review of an appeal court's order that reversed a trial court judgment which found that Texas' school financing system violated the Texas Constitution. This system relied on local property taxes to fund schools.