PART TWO: CONTENT OF COMPREHENSIVE ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LAW PART TWO – II has grown. In other jurisdictions, anti-discrimination laws specify the range of fines to be issued in cases of a finding of discrimination. In some cases, this has led to concerns that the upper limits of possible fines may not be sufficiently high to be “dissuasive”.592 Moreover, in some countries, there is a documented phenomenon of large companies or other service providers “paying a discrimination licence”, that is, being willing to leave discrimination problems unaddressed in practice and simply paying fines in individual cases, if these are insufficiently high. Treaty bodies have expressed concern regarding the low levels of fines for discrimination in States’ national laws and made relevant recommendations.593 These statements reflect the fact that, if States are to discharge their obligation to provide effective remedy, it is essential that anti-discrimination law provides for a proportionate approach to determining the level of fines. SANCTIONS IN THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION: THE MARSHALL CASE594 Helen Marshall was employed by the Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority. In 1980, she was fired, for the sole reason that she had passed the age of 60, the age at which she was eligible for a State pension. The pension qualifying age for men was 65. Ms. Marshall argued before the domestic court that the dismissal was contrary to the European Union Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions. She sought appropriate compensation on the basis of her loss of earnings. The domestic tribunals ruled in favour of Ms. Marshall. However, according to the Sex Discrimination Act, the maximum damages that could be awarded in any discrimination case was 6,250 pounds. Ms Marshall appealed. Article 6 of the Directive requires that member States provide a remedy. The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that “the interpretation of Article 6 … must be that reparation of the loss and damage sustained by a person injured as a result of discriminatory dismissal may not be limited to an upper limit fixed a priori or by excluding an award of interest to compensate for the loss sustained by the recipient of the compensation as a result” of the passage of time until the sum awarded is paid.595 Some jurisdictions deal with discrimination as a matter of administrative law, in which it is effectively treated as a misdemeanour. In addition to fines, administrative sanctions may include warnings, disciplinary measures or similar measures. Alongside courts, administrative sanctions can be issued by administrative bodies such as specialized equality bodies and entities with powers in relation to labour, education, consumer protection, the media or other specific domains.596 In situations in which national legislators have enabled equality bodies with the power to sanction perpetrators – a matter treated below in section IV.C.3 of this part – these are usually within administrative law. As noted, some jurisdictions criminalize discrimination, with the effect that sanctions include – in addition to fines and penalties – deprivation of liberty. However, for the reasons set out above, the application of penal sanctions for cases of discrimination that do not involve violence or hate crimes is disproportionate and likely to be ineffective for a number of practical reasons. 592 Isabelle Chopin, Carmine Conte and Edith Chambrier (for the European Network of Legal Experts in Gender Equality and NonDiscrimination), A Comparative Analysis of Non-Discrimination Law in Europe 2018 (Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union, 2019), pp. 114–119. 593 See, for example, CRPD/C/RUS/CO/1, para. 13; and CCPR/C/GEO/CO/4, para. 6. 594 Court of Justice of the European Union, Marshall v. Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority, Case C-271/91, Judgment, 2 August 1993. 595 Ibid., para. 32. 596 Iordache and Ionescu, “Discrimination and its sanctions”. 79