Denmark’s Supreme Court rules on 23 November in a case from Helsingør, and may decide whether the “non-Western” criterion in the parallel society housing law amounts to ethnic discrimination.
According to DR, the lawyers in the case completed their arguments this week before seven Supreme Court judges. Both sides expect the court to assess whether the criterion breaks the ban on ethnic discrimination.
The dispute goes back to 2020. That year, the housing association Boliggården terminated 91 leases in the public housing area Nøjsomhed in Helsingør as part of a physical development plan. The case concerns whether those terminations were lawful.
What the two sides argue
Attorney Eddie Omar Rosenberg Khawaja, who represents the tenants, argues the terminations were illegal. Attorney Henrik Qwist, who represents Boliggården, rejects that. Khawaja has also argued that using the non-Western background criterion conflicts with the prohibition on ethnic discrimination.
The housing court in Helsingør, and later Østre Landsret in 2022, sided with Boliggården. As reported by AFP, the lower courts reasoned that the law’s “non-Western” wording does not refer to one ethnic group, and therefore does not breach the Equal Treatment Act.
Per Fagbladet Boligen, the Supreme Court heard the case over two days, on 6 and 9 November 2026, with seven judges instead of the usual five. Qwist says that only happens when matters of principle are at stake.
Why the ruling comes now
The government defines a parallel society as a deprived housing area where the share of immigrants and descendants from non-Western countries exceeds 50 percent. The definition has drawn criticism from a UN committee in 2022, from the EU Court of Justice advocate general in February 2025, and from the Council of Europe’s ECRI in a report in October.
DR reports that the Helsingør case has waited since 2022 for the Supreme Court, which was waiting for a judgment from the EU Court of Justice in December 2025 in a similar Danish case. The EU court found that the non-Western origin criterion can constitute discrimination, but left the final assessment to Danish courts.
Louise Halleskov, professor at the law department at Aarhus University, says the appointment of seven judges indicates the case is seen as one of principle. She notes that a finding of direct ethnic discrimination would amount to a real overruling of the legislation, which would then have to be changed. She adds that the court may also decide only the specific case.
Khawaja says that if the Supreme Court addresses the criterion, the regulations imposed on those housing areas are in fact not lawful. Cases concerning Mjølnerparken in Copenhagen and Schackenborgvænge in Slagelse are awaiting treatment by the high court.
What the case means for non-Western residents of Danish public housing
Public housing in Denmark is called almene boliger, and estates are assessed against the government’s parallel society criteria, including the 50 percent non-Western threshold. The Local reports that the 2018 law requires affected estates to rent at least 60 percent of homes at market rates by 2030. That is the legal machinery behind demolitions, sales and lease terminations in areas on the lists.
For residents classified as immigrants or descendants from non-Western countries, the category is based on country of origin, not on residence permit type or current nationality. Khawaja told Al Jazeera that a ruling could affect every estate on the government’s lists, which are updated each 1 December.
What is not yet known is how far the court will go. Halleskov says the consequences will only be clear when judgment falls on 23 November, and that the outcome would also bear directly on the other pending cases about the so-called ghetto legislation. Troels Schultz Larsen, associate professor at Roskilde University, says the international criticism reflects surprise abroad that Denmark uses the criterion at all.
