Search

How can we help?

Icon

Greek government falls short with discriminatory height requirement for police

The ECJ has held in Ypourgos Ethnikis Pedias kai Thriskevmaton v Kalliri that a minimum height requirement of 170cm imposed by the Greek Government for men and women wishing to join the police force, amounted to indirect sex discrimination and could not be objectively justified.

The case concerned a women who applied to the Greek police academy, however was rejected as she was only 168cm tall, falling 2cm short of the Government’s 170cm minimum height requirement. The ECJ held that having a required height for all applicants “constitutes indirect sex discrimination since it works to the disadvantage of far more women than men.”

The ECJ held that having a required height for all applicants “constitutes indirect sex discrimination since it works to the disadvantage of far more women than men.

The ECJ additionally stated that the minimum height requirement could not be justified on the basis of being “either appropriate or necessary for the objective it had purported to achieve”, namely ensuring that aspiring police officers had the physical capability for the job. The Court did however note that specific tests of candidates’ physical ability could be used instead of height limit, for example various fitness tests for candidates.

This case serves as a reminder to employers that any restrictions which cannot be objectively justified may amount to indirect discrimination.

Disclaimer
This information is for guidance purposes only and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. Please refer to the full General Notices on our website.

Author profile

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

art
  • 02 July 2026
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

Litigation and Artificial Intelligence: Where are we now?

In the recent case of Cork and another v Smith, the High Court publicly admonished a law firm and two of its solicitors after they had produced and submitted two AI-generated letters to the court containing misleading and false information in relation to a block transfer application made under Rule 12.37 of the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016.

Pub
  • 30 June 2026
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

Overview of the new ICC Arbitration Rules: Key changes – Episode 1

In this episode, Jack Hobbs (Clarkslegal) and Christopher Howitt (Three Stone) discuss the major updates in the ICC Arbitration Rules 2026 and what they mean for practitioners, clients, and the future of international arbitration.

art
  • 26 June 2026
  • Corporate and M&A

Exit Readiness Consultation: Prepare your business for a successful sale

Take the first step toward a smoother, more profitable business exit. Our Exit Readiness service provides tailored health checks, expert guidance, and a free initial consultation—helping you address potential issues early and maximise your sale value.

art
  • 25 June 2026
  • Immigration

Justice and Home Affairs Committee – Settlement, Citizenship and Integration: What the House of Lords Report Means for Migrants

Discover how the House of Lords report influences UK settlement, citizenship, and integration policies. Learn what it means for migrants and employers.

art
  • 24 June 2026
  • Employment

What are employer’s obligations during a heatwave?

During the summer, employers can come across employee issues relating to the heat and hot weather. How can employers handle hot weather and what are employer obligations during a heatwave?

art
  • 23 June 2026
  • Employment

Pride month and employment law: Ensuring compliance with LGBTQ+ protections

With each Pride month, companies unveil rainbow logos and send office wide emails of solidarity. These gestures are valuable, giving visible demonstrations of support, but only really make a difference if those companies are able to truly say that their policies and practices are inclusive and legally compliant.