CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 21 février 1997

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s85F2E5C5 { width:30.44pt; display:inline-block } .sBDAE81C4 { width:27.67pt; display:inline-block } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. February 1997 Van Raalte v. the Netherlands - 20060/92 Judgment 21.2.1997 Article 14 Discrimination Exemption from obligation to pay contributions under social-welfare scheme applying to unmarried childless women aged 45 or over but not to men in the same position: violation I.   ARTICLE 14 OF THE CONVENTION TAKEN TOGETHER WITH ARTICLE 1 OF PROTOCOL No.   1 Case concerns the right of the State to "secure the payment of taxes or other contributions" and therefore comes within the ambit of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Article 14 of the Convention applicable. Difference in treatment based on gender - exemption in question ran counter to underlying character of scheme - while State enjoys certain margin of appreciation in introducing exemptions to contributory obligations, Article 14 requires in principle that these apply even-handedly to both men and women -just as women aged 45 or over may give birth, there may be men of 45 or younger who may be unable to procreate - unmarried childless woman aged 45 or over may become eligible for benefits under scheme - argument that to levy contributions from unmarried childless women aged 45 or over would impose unfair emotional burden might equally well apply to unmarried childless men or childless couples - difference in treatment not justified. Conclusion : violation of Article 14 of the Convention taken together with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (unanimously). II.   ARTICLE 50 OF THE CONVENTION Pecuniary damage:   finding of violation does not entitle applicant to retrospective exemption (eight votes to one). Non-pecuniary damage:   judgment in itself sufficient just satisfaction (unanimously). Costs and expenses:   applicant's claims accepted (unanimously). Conclusion : respondent State to pay specified sum in respect of costs and expenses.     © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes