Italian Gender Equality Case
Italy Constitutional Court
Constitutional Case No. 163/1993
- Written by Mary Katherine Cunningham, JD
Facts
A woman in the province of Trento, Italy applied for a job in the provincial firefighting service, but the firefighting service denied her application for failing to meet the minimum-height requirement. The woman brought a complaint to the provincial commission, challenging her exclusion from the firefighting service. The commission considered Article 4 of the Trento Provincial Law of February 15, 1980 (Article 4). Article 4 mandated that anyone seeking to become a firefighter must be at least 1.65 meters, or 5 feet, 5 inches. The average height of an Italian woman was between 1.51 and 1.73 meters, whereas the average height of an Italian man was between 1.63 and 1.87 meters. Article 4 also made no distinction between male applicants and female applicants. The magistrate of Trent sent a constitutional question to the Italy Constitutional Court, seeking a ruling on the constitutionality of Article 4. The magistrate noted in the referral to the Italy Constitutional Court that the height limitation in Article 4 did not appear to be justified by the nature of firefighting. Furthermore, the magistrate noted a potential violation of Article 3 of the Constitution of Italy, which required “more favorable treatments for women . . . [to eradicate] the causes of traditional discrimination against women.”
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.