Making Sense of Equality Law: A Review of the Hepple Report
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.00349 |
| Author | Joanna Harrington |
| Published date | 01 September 2001 |
| Date | 01 September 2001 |
Making Sense of Equality Law: A Review of the Hepple
Report
Joanna Harrington*
In mid-2000, the Centre for Public Law and the Judge Institute of Management
Studies at the University of Cambridge published the results and
recommendations of the independent review of the enforcement of anti-
discrimination laws in the United Kingdom (UK) undertaken by the Centre and
Institute under the leadership of Professor Bob Hepple and with the financial
support of the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust and the Nuffield Foundation.
The resulting report, entitled Equality: A New Framework,
1
is a comprehensive
study of the inadequacies of the current patchwork of anti-discrimination laws in
the UK. Relying on targeted case studies, a broad consultation process and
interviews with stakeholders, as well as legal research,
2
the Hepple Report
makes 53 recommendations which together provide policy-makers with a
practical blueprint for a new legislative framework to ensure the full promotion
of equality, securing the UK’s compliance with European Union (EU) and
international human rights law. This note will review the key findings and
recommendations of the Hepple Report, making reference to comparative
developments in Canada where at least four wide-ranging equality law reviews
have taken place in the last decade.
3
A fifth review concerning the Canadian
4
the main anti-discrimination measure enacted by the federal
government,
5
took place while the Cambridge-based review was under way and
ßThe Modern Law Review Limited 2001 (MLR 64:5, September). Published by Blackwell Publishers,
108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA. 757
* Faculty of Law, University of Western Ontario, Canada.
I am grateful for the suggestions made by an anonymous referee on an earlier draft.
1 The full citation is B. Hepple, M. Coussey and T. Choudhury, Equality: A New Framework Report of
the Independent Review of the Enforcement of UK Anti-Discrimination Legislation (Oxford: Hart
Publishing, 2000) hereinafter the ‘Hepple Report’.
2 The review commissioned several experts to write working papers on current equality law issues.
These papers were published with the review’s consultation document, Options for Reform,in
December 1999.
3 Ontario Human Rights Code Review Task Force, Achieving Equality: A Report on Human Rights
Reform (The Cornish Report) (Toronto: Ministry of Citizenship, 1992); Alberta Human Rights
Commission, Equal in Dignity and Rights: A Review of Human Rights in Alberta by the Alberta
Human Rights Commission (Edmonton: Alberta Human Rights Commission, 1994); W.W. Black,
Report on Human Rights in British Columbia (Victoria: British Columbia Human Rights
Commission, 1995); Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission, Renewing the Vision: Human Rights
in Saskatchewan (Saskatoon: Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission, 1996). See also W.W. Black,
Reassessing Statutory Human Rights Legislation Thirty Years Later: Human Rights Enforcement in
British Columbia (Ottawa: Human Rights Research and Education Centre, 1995). For an earlier
review, see C. Ferris, Towards a World Family: A Report and Recommendations Respecting Human
Rights in New Brunswick (Fredericton: Human Rights Commission, 1989).
4 RSC 1985, H-6.
5 Under Canada’s constitutional arrangements, the securing of equality in employment, education,
housing and the provision of services is largely the responsibility of provincial governments. Some
categories of employers and service providers are, however, federal responsibility including those in
the fields of banking, communications and inter-provincial transportation. The federal nature of the
proposed reforms does not, however, hinder the ability of the proposals to contribute to the general
development of Canadian anti-discrimination law.
To continue reading
Request your trial