<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/ http://dublincore.org/schemas/xmls/simpledc20021212.xsd">
  <dc:identifier>http://dx.doi.org/10.59704/b297a1e09142d774</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>https://verfassungsblog.de/justifiable-caution/</dc:identifier>
  <dc:title>Justifiable Caution - The Approach of the Court of Justice to Religion in the Context of Rapid Change</dc:title>
  <dc:creator>McCrea, Ronan</dc:creator>
  <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
  <dc:date>2025-12-17</dc:date>
  <dc:type>electronic resource</dc:type>
  <dc:format>text/html</dc:format>
  <dc:subject>ddc:342</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>CJEU</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>EU</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>Egenberger</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>communities’ corporate religious freedom</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>freedom of religion</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>EU</dc:subject>
  <dc:publisher>Verfassungsblog</dc:publisher>
  <dc:relation>Verfassungsblog--2366-7044</dc:relation>
  <dc:rights>CC BY-SA 4.0</dc:rights>
  <dc:description>Religion in the workplace brings together two areas of law in which the CJEU has taken markedly different approaches. This has left the Court torn between following its assertive approach in relation to discrimination in the workplace and its deferential approach in relation to religion’s role in society. This sets wide but meaningful boundaries on Member State autonomy regarding religion’s place in their societies. While this caution has been heavily criticised, in the context of the rapid and unprecedented religious change in Europe, it is the most prudent and politically sustainable approach for the time being.</dc:description>
</dc>
