Key facts of the case - The case involved a Muslim teacher who challenged the obligation to wear the headscarf in a Muslim school. The applicant, applying for the function of a teacher (Arabic) in a Muslim school was rejected by the school board because she does not wear a headscarf. The school’s code of conduct prescribed the head scarf for all female Muslim teachers but contained also an exemption procedure for non-Muslim teachers. The school denied that this constituted discrimination on religious grounds and asked, being a religious school, application of Art. 5(2) of the Equal Treatment Act (ETA).

Main reasoning of the court - The Equal Treatment Commission accepted the applicability of Art. 5(2) ETA and was of the opinion that the school’s policy (the dress code) aims at the preservation of its religious principles.
Having regard to the requirement that exemptions to the equal treatment norms are to be interpreted restrictively, the Equal Treatment Commission decided that the school did not explain why the dress code was necessary for the preservation of the schools religious principles in the case of a language teacher. The conclusion of the Equal Treatment Commission was that the requirement was not necessary and thus in breach of Article 5(2) ETA.