The cases were paired, not identical
The Court of Justice announced the Achbita and Bougnaoui judgments on 14 March 2017. Both arose from employment disputes involving Muslim women’s headscarves, but the questions were different. The Court’s joint press release makes that distinction visible before the reader reaches the full judgments.
In Achbita, the reference concerned an employer’s general rule on visible political, philosophical and religious signs. The Court distinguished direct discrimination from the possibility of indirect discrimination and discussed the conditions under which a restriction might be justified. Its discussion left factual assessments to the national court.
The customer’s preference
Bougnaoui concerned, among other matters, the significance of a customer’s wish not to receive services from a worker wearing a headscarf. The Court did not treat that preference as the occupational requirement contemplated by the relevant provision. This is a different proposition from the analysis of a general internal rule.
Putting the decisions together in one sentence can erase this difference. A more useful comparison asks whether a rule existed, whom it covered, how it operated, which discrimination category was invoked and which justification was proposed. Those questions keep a newspaper phrase such as a headscarf ban from becoming a substitute for the issues actually referred.
What a preliminary ruling supplies
A preliminary ruling answers questions about the interpretation of European Union law within litigation that continues in a national setting. That procedural relationship should remain visible in any account of the result. The European judgment and the national disposition are separate documents, even when a news report compresses them into a single outcome.
For a seminar discussion, compare the operative parts before comparing the policy implications. Then return to the facts each reference supplied. This sequence creates space for disagreement about the decisions while retaining a common account of what the Court was asked and what it answered in 2017.
References
- CJEU: Achbita and Bougnaoui, press release 30/17
The Court's summary of the judgments of 14 March 2017, with links to the decisions. A press release is distinct from the judgments.
- Achbita, C-157/15: judgment
Official text of the judgment of 14 March 2017.
- Bougnaoui, C-188/15: judgment
Official text of the judgment of 14 March 2017.
Filed under Law & society. Sources and corrections.