• Home
  • About us
  • People
  • Blog
  • News
  • Video
  • Webinars
  • Seminars
  • Podcasts
  • Publications
    • Journal Articles
    • Working Papers
    • OxHRH Annual Report
    • Books & Chapters
    • U of OxHRH Journal
  • Events
  • Journal
  • GDPR Compliance
  • Home
  • Home OHRH
  • Media
  • Search
  • Test page
  • Publications
  • About us
  • News
  • A big page
  • Contact
  • Disclaimer
  • Site Map
  • Legal
  • Event archive
  • Blog
    • Comments Policy
    • Contribute to the Blog
  • Events
  • Journal
  • People
  • publications test
  • Publications New
    • Inner Publications Landing
  • #16346 (no title)
Oxford Human Rights Hub logo
  • Home
  • About us
  • People
  • Blog
  • News
  • Media
  • Events
  • Publications
  • Journal

New publication: Human Dignity, 'Unfair Discrimination' and Guidance (2014) Oxford Journal of Legal Studies (forthcoming)

admin - 18th February 2014
OxHRH
Equality and Non-Discrimination

OxHRH founding Editor and Administrator, Chris McConnachie, has recently published ‘Human Dignity, ‘Unfair Discrimination’ and Guidance’ (2014) Oxford Journal of Legal Studies (forthcoming).

(Electronic access here).

Abstract:

In Human Dignity: Lodestar for Equality in South Africa, Justice Laurie Ackermann, one of the 11 judges appointed to the South African Constitutional Court after the end of apartheid, presents the most extensive examination yet of the connection between human dignity, equality and the prohibition of ‘unfair discrimination’ under the South African Constitution. This article focuses on one of Ackermann’s central assumptions: that a deeper understanding of human dignity can provide South African courts with clear guidance in identifying unfair discrimination. I argue that human dignity cannot offer this type of guidance. Instead, I contend that the search for guidance should begin with a closer examination of the Constitutional Court’s reasoning in its unfair discrimination decisions. I proceed to develop a novel understanding of the Court’s reasoning which, I argue, offers a surer route to the guidance that Ackermann seeks and indicates where his important appeals for transparent, rigorous judicial reasoning are best directed.

 

 

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related blog posts

The Tune Goes On: Appointments to Tribunals Must Adhere to The Two-Thirds Gender Rule
Can trans children consent to puberty blocking drugs? The High Court of England and Wales doubts it.
Love Jihad Law: A Discriminatory Tool in the Hands of Divisive Indian Politicians

Related events

New Oxford vs Cambridge Moot Court Case Competition on Disability Law
External

Related news

U of OxHRH J Call for Submissions-Taking Stock: Ten Years of the Equality Act 2010

Contact Us

oxfordhumanrightshub@law.ox.ac.uk

Oxford Human Rights Hub
The Faculty of Law, University of Oxford,
St Cross Building,
St Cross Road,
Oxford OX1 3UL

© 2021 Oxford Human Rights Hub | Site by One


Sign up for the OHRH Newsletter

Your email address*:

New email sign up
reCAPTCHA
* Find out how we use your data