Belgium

In Judgment No. 2019/AL/66, the Liège Labour Court of Appeal held that the dismissal of an employee on the grounds of her desire to become pregnant and the period of incapacity certified by her doctor following a miscarriage was discriminatory. The employer was ordered to pay compensation. The Court found that the employer failed to demonstrate that the dismissal was based on legitimate, non-discriminatory grounds such as a company reorganization or professional misconduct.

In this case, the Belgian Court of Cassation reviewed an appeal challenging the legal characterization applied by the lower courts and the severity of the sentence. The appellant argued that a finding of rape necessarily excluded any additional conviction for indecent assault, and sought a reduction of his sentence. The Court of Cassation rejected this reasoning, holding that rape may, depending on the circumstances, be accompanied by a separate finding of indecent assault, and that the two offenses are not mutually exclusive.

In Judgment No. P.22.0306.F, the Belgian Court of Cassation addressed the material element of the criminal offense of sexism, as established under the Law of May 22, 2014 combating sexism in public spaces.

In Judgment No. P.23.0492.N, the Belgian Court of Cassation reviewed sexist and discriminatory remarks made by a lecturer during a conference held at a Belgian university. The Court of Cassation clarified how the mental element of the offense of sexism should be established. It held that intent can be inferred from factual elements identified by the trial judge, such as the nature and context of the remarks, where these cannot reasonably be interpreted otherwise.

The Royal Decree of 26 April 2024 Granting a Subsidy to the Non-Profit “European LGBT Police Association” for the “Rainbow Cops” Project, grants a subsidy to the non-profit European LGBT Police Association to cover certain costs related to the “Rainbow Cops” project. This decision forms part of the Belgian national budget and supports the association’s initiatives at the European level.

A female employee claimed that she was discriminated against with regard to her salary at the time of her recruitment and subsequently as she became more senior in the company.  She argued that she was granted a lower salary at the beginning of her employment than male employees with equal qualifications and that she was not later granted a higher salary in the same way as male employees who received such higher salary only based on their seniority.The Court of first instance rejected the claims of the female employee.

With regard to the marriage of persons of different nationality Belgian courts will ordinarily look to the national statutes governing each person to determine whether the conditions of marriage have been met.  Here, however, the Court refused to look to Algerian law to determine whether the conditions for marriage had been met when called upon to decide whether the marriage between an Algerian Muslim woman and an Italian non-Muslim man could be declared null.  The Brussels Court of Appeal stated that Algerian law, which includes the prohibition for a Muslim woman marrying a non-M

The Brussels Court of Appeal recognized marital rape and found that the husband who used serious violence to coerce his wife into having sex against her wishes was guilty of the criminal offense of rape.  Furthermore, this act was neither subject to bail nor to a defense of misunderstanding.

Article 134 of the Belgian Penal Code criminalizes sexual assault, defined as non-consensual sexual acts or forcing someone to witness such acts. The penalty is 3 to 5 years in prison. Rape is separately criminalized under Article 138, punishable by 5 to 10 years. Articles 139–150 provide aggravated penalties where severe circumstances occur (serious violence, torture, confinement, weapons, death, or vulnerable/minor victims).

Articles 206–213 of the criminalize the performance, facilitation, and promotion of female genital mutilation (FGM). Article 206 provides for a penalty of 3 to 5 years in prison. Article 211 penalizes incitement, promotion, or dissemination of FGM-related material, with 12–24 months’ probation or a fine. Aggravated circumstances apply if the offense results in death or involves a minor or vulnerable person.