MVP

Tag: court ruling

  • Court Rules Fire Service Discriminated Against Female Firefighter in Landmark Case

    Court Rules Fire Service Discriminated Against Female Firefighter in Landmark Case

    A female firefighter has successfully claimed €10,000 in damages after a court found the Fire Service discriminated against her by denying her training that was provided to her male counterparts and forcing her to wear oversized boots for three years.

    • In 2018, she initiated legal proceedings against the Fire Service through her lawyer E. Korakidis, seeking €50,000 in damages for the discriminatory treatment she faced.

    Female firefighter: Ruling from the Labour Disputes Court

    The Labour Disputes Court in Paphos determined that the firefighter experienced direct gender discrimination during her tenure at the Paphos Airport Fire Station, where she served for three years and three months.

    Discriminatory Treatment and Oversized Boots

    The court revealed that the firefighter was provided with special airport fire boots in size 42, despite her wearing a size 39. Additionally, she was systematically denied training on newer airport fire vehicles between late October 2015 and early January 2018, while her male colleagues received this crucial training.

    Timeline of Events

    The firefighter began her career with the Police on 6 April 2009, transitioning to the Fire Service on 27 July 2009. Following her placement at Paphos Fire Station, she quickly became aware of the disparities in treatment compared to her male colleagues.

    In 2018, she initiated legal proceedings against the Fire Service through her lawyer E. Korakidis, seeking €50,000 in damages for the discriminatory treatment she faced.

    Claims of Intimidation

    In her testimony, the firefighter also detailed experiences of violent and intimidating behaviour from a male sergeant, who she claimed was protected by her superiors. Furthermore, she highlighted that her transfer to Paphos Airport was executed without the necessary approvals, leading to significant personal costs in travel, which were not compensated by the Fire Service.

    Legal Proceedings and Arguments

    The Attorney General’s office contested the claims, arguing that the allegations of gender discrimination were unfounded and that the claims fell outside of the one-year period permitted by law. They maintained that the issues raised pertained to a civil servant-public authority relationship, which they believed did not fall under the jurisdiction of the Labour Court.

    Court Findings on Discrimination

    Despite the Attorney General’s arguments, the judges—E. Konstantinou (president), S. Delitsikkou, and M. Filippidis—conducted a thorough analysis of the testimonies and applicable gender discrimination laws. While they dismissed claims of a hostile environment for female firefighters, they confirmed that the plaintiff was indeed discriminated against on two significant grounds: the lack of training on new fire vehicles and the provision of ill-fitting boots.

    Compensation for Moral Harm

    In their decision, the judges awarded compensation solely for the moral harm caused by the direct discrimination the firefighter endured. They assigned €6,000 for the failure to provide training on new airport fire vehicles and €4,000 for the oversized boots. This total compensation also includes interest accrued since 2014.

    Significance of the Ruling

    This landmark case marks the first instance where a firefighter has successfully secured damages for gender discrimination against the Fire Service. The ruling underscores the ongoing challenges faced by women in traditionally male-dominated fields and highlights the importance of equal treatment and opportunities in the workplace.

    Gender Equality in Cyprus

    In the broader context of gender equality, Cyprus ranks last in the European Union, indicating significant gaps in women’s rights and equal treatment in various sectors. The court’s ruling may serve as a catalyst for further discussions and reforms aimed at addressing these disparities.

  • Terrorism — Terrorism-Related Sentence Increased by Appeals Court

    Terrorism — Terrorism-Related Sentence Increased by Appeals Court

    A recent ruling has seen the sentence of a man convicted of terrorism-related offences doubled by an Appeals Court. The man, now 28, was arrested in Limassol in January 2021, where he was subsequently found guilty of serious charges that warranted a prison sentence.

    • This ruling signals a firm stance on terrorism-related offences by the judicial system, reflecting a commitment to addressing threats to public safety decisively.

    The initial sentence handed down by the criminal court was two years, a decision that the attorney-general’s office deemed too lenient. Following this, they lodged an appeal against the ruling. The Appeals Court reviewed the case and delivered its judgment last week, agreeing to double the sentence to four years.

    In its assessment, the Appeals Court upheld the criminal court’s findings, which revealed significant and concerning evidence on the defendant’s mobile phone. Authorities found extensive materials related to the manufacture of bombs and makeshift explosive devices, along with hazardous chemical and biological substances. Furthermore, the phone contained instructional videos detailing how to execute attacks on various public venues, including restaurants, buses, and nightclubs.

    The criminal court had cited the nature and volume of these instructional materials as indicative of a person preparing to commit acts of terrorism. The Appeals Court also dismissed arguments put forth by the defence attorney, who contended that the original court had misinterpreted the defendant’s intentions and had placed undue weight on his ideological beliefs and political opinions.

    This ruling signals a firm stance on terrorism-related offences by the judicial system, reflecting a commitment to addressing threats to public safety decisively.

  • Animal abuse — Limassol Woman Receives Suspended Sentence and Dog Ownership Ban for Animal Abuse

    Animal abuse — Limassol Woman Receives Suspended Sentence and Dog Ownership Ban for Animal Abuse

    animal abuse — A 77-year-old woman in Limassol has been handed a suspended prison sentence after being convicted of animal abuse involving dozens of dogs. The Limassol District Court has also imposed a three-year ban on her owning, maintaining, or supervising dogs.

    The court delivered various prison terms for multiple charges related to her treatment of animals, with the longest sentence set at three months. However, all sentences were suspended for three years, taking into account her age, clean criminal record, and the context of the offences, particularly the lack of malicious intent.

    The case against the woman began on 17 July 2020 when a complaint was lodged with the police by state veterinary services. An initial raid uncovered three dogs in horrific conditions on her property. The animals were found severely dehydrated and suffering from chronic ailments, with one dog being bedridden.

    Despite immediate veterinary care, one of the dogs did not survive. The other two were discovered locked in a toilet. The distressing findings prompted authorities to escalate their investigation, leading to a secondary search in early August 2020. This search revealed an additional eight dogs, all of whom were also living under appalling conditions.

    During the court proceedings, the judge took into consideration several factors, including the elapsed time since the offences and the absence of any prior convictions. The decision to suspend the sentences was made to prevent future incidents, reflecting a balance between accountability and compassion given the defendant’s circumstances.