Thlimmenos v Greece

In brief

Grand Chamber. Established that Article 14 ECHR is violated not only when states treat similarly-situated persons differently without justification but also when states fail to treat differently-situated persons differently without objective and reasonable justification. In our characterisation, a foundational ECHR authority for differentiated treatment as a form of accommodation; the judgment does not speak of accommodation, and its finding was that the State breached Article 14 with Article 9 by legislating a bar on convicted persons without appropriate exceptions for a conviction arising from religious belief (paras 44, 47–48).

Key provisions

• Article 14 ECHR (Thlimmenos principle) — Failure to treat significantly different situations differently, without objective and reasonable justification, is itself discrimination : Article 14 is violated when states fail to treat differently persons whose situations are significantly different, without objective and reasonable justification. Discrimination thus covers both like-situations-treated-differently and different-situations-treated-alike.

When relevant

Cases where the practice argues that a respondent’s failure to provide differentiated treatment is itself discrimination under Convention principles. The judgment supports this for a State’s failure to write appropriate exceptions into a legislative rule, where the facts fall within another Convention right and there is no objective and reasonable justification (paras 40–42, 44, 46–48). Extension to an individual examination, a reasonable adjustment, positive-action requirements or respondents other than the State is toolkit analysis.