English for Lawyers 2 Lecturer: Miljen Matijašević Session 7 e-mail: miljen.matijasevic@gmail.com Session 7

Today’s session Revision of the last session Case Method of Law Teaching Case studies

Revision of the last session The American Presidency

Revision of the last session Name some appointments made by the President. What are his diplomatic and judicial powers? What is the State of the Union address? What are the duties of the VP? What is the Electoral College? What is decided in the popular vote? Which vote is the final vote?

The Case Method of Law Teaching Unit 18

Case Method of Law Teaching Developed at the Harvard Law School in late 19th century by Dean Christopher C. Langdell Harvard Law School – the oldest US law school still operating, est. in 1817 Considered the best law school in the US right after Yale Law School Highly selective admission – only about 10% of applicants get admitted every year Among HLS graduates are President Barrack Obama and Chief Justice John G. Roberts

Case Method of Law Teaching The method used previously was doctrine- based Involved analysis of the abstract principles of law Langdell thought it would be more useful for students to focus on legal opinions He developed the case method, which consisted of analyses of real-life court cases

Case Method of Law Teaching He thought this was the most suitable way to study American law, as it was a common law system He collected paradigmatic cases from judicial practice into a textbook, called a casebook This method continued to be developed by other professors Cases taken from law reports

Case Method of Law Teaching Some would narrow down the cases to the basic facts, while others would use the original law reports The focus was on the judicial opinion, but the point was to find connections between the abstract doctrines and the actual facts of the case and the points of law The point was to see how law is interpreted and administered in practice Students invited to criticise the courts’ reasonings and decisions

Case Method of Law Teaching What proved especially valuable was comparing how similar problems were interpreted and handled differently within different state legislations This way the student may not gain comprehensive knowledge of the doctrine in a certain area of law, but learns about the ways legal problems arise and are solved in practice

Case Method of Law Teaching What, in your opinion, are the benefits and drawbacks of the case method? Do you think it is a valuable method of teaching law in a civil law country? Law teaching in eastern Europe is generally more academic, while in western Europe it has a more down-to-earth, practical approach. What is your opinion on the two approaches?

Eweida v British Airways PLC [2008] Case study EMPLOYMENT LAW

Discrimination and Harrassment Direct Discrimination occurs when someone is treated less favourably than another person because of a protected characteristic they have or are thought to have (perceptive discrimination), or because they associate with someone who has a protected characteristic (associative discrimination). Indirect Discrimination can occur when you have a condition, rule, policy or even a practice in your organisation that applies to everyone but particularly disadvantages people who share a protected characteristic. Harassment is "unwanted conduct related to a relevant protected characteristic, which has the purpose or effect of violating an individual's dignity or creating intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for that individual".

Eweida v British Airways Plc FACTS Nadia Eweida from Twickenham near London is employed as a member of check-in staff with British Airways (BA). She is a practicing Coptic Christian and likes to display her religious affiliation by wearing a small silver cross on a necklace. From 20 May to 20 September 2006 she attended work wearing the cross and refused to conceal it even though BA’s uniform policy specifically prohibited the wearing of visible items of jewellery to its check-in staff. The dress code did not make an exception for items displaying a symbol of faith. Eweida was not dismissed, but on 20 September she was sent home and remained on unpaid leave until February 2007, when a new uniformy policy entered into force, allowing the wearing of a faith or charity symbol.

Eweida v British Airways Plc Eweida brought a number of claims against BA, including claims under the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003 of direct and indirect discrimination and harassment. Do you think she should win the case?

Eweida v British Airways Plc DECISION Ms. Eweida’s claims were dismissed. It was not established that Ms. Eweida was treated less favourably than other employees on the grounds of her religion. All employees regardless of their religious affiliation, if any, were expected to abide by the same rules. As concerns her claims of indirect discrimination, the tribunal held that the rule did not put Christians at a particular disadvantage in comparison to others. No proof was submitted of any unreasonable and unwanted conduct by BA which would substantiate the claim of harassment. All the defendant company did was enforce its uniform policy, which was not found by the tribunal to be discriminatory.

Eweida v British Airways Plc DECISION Eweida appealed with two appellate instances in the UK her appeal was dismissed by both courts (Employment Appeals Tribunal, Court of Appeal) she filed an application with the European Court of Human Rights against the UK she claimed a violation of Article 9 of the European Convention of Human Rights

Article 9 of the ECHR Freedom of thought, conscience and religion Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance. Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Eweida v the United Kingdom DECISION the Court found in favour of Eweida’s claim violation of Article 9 was established the Court said that ‘BA had not struck a fair balance between Ms Eweida’s religious beliefs and the company’s wish to “project a certain corporate image”.’

Thank you for your attention!