With the assistance of the law firm, a case was won in which the Supreme Administrative Court awarded compensation for discrimination in the amount of BGN 4,000. The decision is final and not subject to appeal.
Compensation for discrimination. The case
Valentina* is a blind child whose disability requires 100% outside assistance. In this regard, according to a regulation of the relevant municipality, she was entitled to a social service related to the provision of a personal assistant, whose remuneration is paid under the program for the provision of such a service. For a certain period of time, the child was included in the program in question, and her mother, Anelia, was appointed as her personal assistant.
Amendments and additions to the ordinance governing the provision of social services have introduced a condition for applying for inclusion in the program, according to which the disability must be of such a nature that the child needs to use technical aids. Valentina, being blind, does not need such aids and is therefore excluded from the program as not meeting the conditions for the provision of social services.
Valentina’s father, Svetoslav, decides that his daughter’s exclusion from social services on the grounds that she does not need technical aids is unfair and lodges a complaint with the Commission for Protection against Discrimination against the municipality in question, arguing that the introduction of the new eligibility requirements for applicants in itself constitutes unequal treatment.
Initially, the Commission for Protection against Discrimination rejected the complaint as unfounded. Svetoslav appealed the Commission’s decision before the relevant administrative court, which overturned the decision and remanded the case for reconsideration.
Upon reconsideration of the case, the Commission acknowledged that imposing a requirement to use technical aids in order to access social services does indeed constitute discrimination on the grounds of disability. The decision was upheld by the relevant administrative court of first instance and by the Supreme Administrative Court.
Insofar as the municipality’s discrimination through the ordinance it adopted constitutes an unlawful act by the administration, Svetoslav decides to file a lawsuit for compensation for discrimination.
* In order to preserve attorney-client privilege, names have been changed.
Court rulings on claims for compensation for discrimination
The request for award of compensation for discrimination Svetoslav, as legal representative of his minor daughter Valentina, with the assistance of the cooperation of Sole proprietorship law firm company “Silvia Petkova” submits before the relevant administrative court at the location of the municipality. Compensation shall be claimed for two groups of non-pecuniary damages.
The first group refers to the fact that, as a result of the act of discrimination, the child developed feelings of inferiority and guilt for being a burden on his parents because he was not born with the “right” disability to be eligible for a personal assistant at the expense of the municipality. The second group of damages consists of the fact that the child was deprived for a long time of the attention of his father, with whom he had a particularly strong relationship, as he devoted all his free time to theoretical preparation for the case before the Commission for Protection against Discrimination, was absent from family dinners, and due to stress and lack of sleep, became nervous and uncommunicative.
The Administrative Court rejected the claim for compensation for discrimination, accepting that the occurrence of the damage remained unproven due to two circumstances.
Firstly, the court cites the perplexing argument that “it is normal for a child to suffer and feel different, as well as to have feelings of ‘inferiority and insignificance’ simply because of their disability.”
The court’s second argument is that Svetoslav and Anelia, Valentina’s parents, violated their obligations under the Family Code to care for her physical, mental, moral, and social development, as they had not made sufficient efforts to ensure that she did not feel the absence of her father and the tension that had arisen in him as a result of his work on the case before the Commission for Protection against Discrimination. In other words, the court considers that the parents, and not the municipality, are to blame for the child’s negative feelings about the unequal treatment she has suffered.
The decision was challenged before the Supreme Administrative Court. As expected, it was overturned, with the supreme judges rejecting in their entirety the arguments put forward by the court of first instance, which had dismissed the claim for compensation for discrimination.
Instead of the incorrect and unlawful decision of the administrative court, the supreme judges ruled otherwise, awarding Valentina compensation for discrimination in the amount of BGN 4,000, together with statutory interest until final payment.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
You can find more interesting topics related to the work of the law firm and the cases it has won in the “News” section.
Sylvia Petkova Sole Proprietorship Law Firm provides specialized legal assistance in cases of violation of the prohibition of discrimination.
Contact:
Working hours: Monday to Friday from 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM
Address: Sofia, 2 Tri Ushi Str., 3rd floor
Tel. 0885 47 77 57
Email: office@petkovalegal.com
Consultations at the office and by telephone are carried out only by prior appointment only.
