Discrimination in goods and services

Discrimination in providing goods, services and facilities-loophole to be closed.

 

There are many “grey” areas that await clarification at present and it is hoped that the new legislation will close these loopholes. However although the draft provisions are to modelled on the SDA and RRA there will be special provisions and exemptions to cover religious establishments and faith schools for instance with damages to include compensation for injury to feelings.  

 Changes in outlook will have to take place for specialist gay bars, clubs, travel and financial services as such services will not be prohibited but rather the same goods and services will have to be made available to people of any sexual orientation in future under Part 3 of the 2006 Act. The legislation will impact most in the travel and tourism, leisure and entertainment, property and financial services sectors.  

The proposed legislation will cover:  

•  Discriminatory practices;
• Discriminatory advertisements or  
• Instructing or causing discrimination    

Whilst employees enjoy extensive protection against discrimination, harassment and victimisation on the grounds of religion or belief or sexual orientation, the government is proposing to close a loophole by extending such protection to cover the provision of goods, facilities or services through Parts 2 and 3 of the Equality Act 2006 either later in 2006 or in 2007.  

Under The Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (SDA), Race Relations Act 1976 (RRA) and Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA) non-employees are already covered so that goods, facilities or services cannot be denied on the basis of sex, race or disability.  

There exist special exemptions to private members’ clubs so that these can be all male or all female but could not exclude on the basis of race or disability depending on size of the club.  

Defendants that have been sued successfully under the above provisions have included a bar that refused to serve women; The Lady Magazine that refused to advertise a vacancy from a male employer and the Professional Footballers’ Association which refused admission to three award dinners to a woman football agent.  

 However it is still lawful to deny goods, facilities or services on the basis of:  

•  religion; 
• belief ; 
• sexual orientation or  
• age  

which can lead to some “curious” results:  

•  A night club could restrict admission legally to under 21’s only or could bar over 40’s but not a particular sex or race;
• A Catholic Church could not ban women members but could bar homosexual workers from a plumbing service;  
• A male dominated engineering business could not ban female secretarial support that has been outsourced but could insist they only take on under 50’s only from an agency;  
• A woman Anne Summers party planner could deny to sell products to men; 
• A Halal butcher could not refuse to serve a Jewish customer on racial grounds;  
• An Indian restaurant could not deny service to Moslem diners;  
• A hotel could refuse to accept reservations for a double-room from same-sex couples but could not do so on the basis they were women; 
• A franchisor could refuse licences to the over 50’s.  

The contents of this article are intended for general information purposes only and shall not be deemed to be, or constitute legal advice. We cannot accept responsibility for any loss as a result of acts or omissions taken in respect of this article.