Court decisions

08-03-2012: ECJ Judgement C-251/11 (Huet, France)
The Fixed-Term Work Directive (1999/70/EC) must be interpreted as not requiring an employment contract of indefinite duration between the State and its employee, which follows that a fixed-term contract must include in identical terms the main clauses of the previous contract. (C-251/11)

01-03-2012: ECJ Judgement C-393/10 (O’Brien, United Kingdom)
European Union law must be interpreted as meaning that it is for the Member States to determine whether judges fall within the personal scope of the Part-Time Work Directive (97/81/EC), subject to the condition that this does not lead to the arbitrary suspension of that category of persons from the protection offered by the Part-Time Work Directive (97/81/EC). (C-393/10)

26-01-2012: ECJ Judgement C-586/10 (Kücük, Germany)
Clause 5 (1) of the Framework Agreement annexed to the Fixed-Term Work Directive must be interpreted as meaning that a temporary need to replace staff constitutes an objective reason for the conclusion of a fixed-term contract. The mere fact that an employer may have to employ temporary replacements on a permanent basis does not mean that there is no objective reason under clause 5 (1) of the Framework Agreement or that there is a misapplication within the meaning of that clause. (C-586/10)

24-01-2012: ECJ Judgement C-282/10 (Dominguez, France)
Article 7 (1) of the Working Time Directive (2003/88/EC) concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time must be interpreted as excluding national regulations or conventions which make claims to paid annual leave conditional on a minimum period of ten days or one month’s actual work. (C-282/10)

22-11-2011: ECJ Judgement C-214/10 (KHS, Germany)
Article 7 (1) of the Working Time Directive (2003/88/EC) must be interpreted as not inhibiting national provisions or practices, which limit, by a carry-over period of 15 months on the expiry of the right to paid annual leave , the gathering of claims to such leave of a worker who is unemployable for several reference periods. (C-214/10)

17-11-2011: ECJ Judgement C-435/10 (van Ardennen, Netherlands)
Article 3 and 4 of the Employer Insolvency Directive (80/987/EEC) must be interpreted as precluding a national rule which obligates employees to register as job seekers in case of insolvency of their employer to fully enforce their right to payment of outstanding wage claims, such as those disputed in the main proceedings. (C-435/10)

20-10-2011: ECJ Judgement C-123/10 (Brachner, Austria)
An annual pension adjustment scheme falls within the scope of Article 3 (1) of Council Directive 79/7/EEC of 19 December 1978 and is therefore subject to the interdiction of discrimination stipulated in Article 4 (1) of that Directive. (C-123/10)

15-09-2011: ECJ Judgement C-155/10 (Williams a.o., United Kingdom)
During his annual leave, a pilot has both claim on his basic salary and on his additional status- and task-obtained salary components. (C-155/10)

13-09-2011: ECJ Judgement C-447/09 (Prigge, Germany)
In principle the social partners can have the authority to determine measures as described in Article 2 (5) of the Equal Treatment Directive (2000/78/EC), if they are enough precisely. A measure as the automatically end of employment by reaching the age of 60 is not necessary to guarantee the public security and protection of health. (C-447/09)

08-09-2011: ECJ Judgement C-177/10 (Rosado Santana, Spain)
The scope of the Fixed-Term Work Directive (1999/70/EC) and the framework agreement in the annex of the Directive also contains the employment relationships towards authorities, etc., of the public sector and prohibits unequal treatment of civil servants only because they have limited contracts. (C177/10)

08-09-2011: ECJ Judgement C-297/10 and C-298/10 (Hennigs and May, Germany)
A collective pay agreement for public sector employees, which determines basic pay in individual salary groups by age categories, infringes the primary-law prohibition of age discrimination as expressed by the Equal Treatment Directive (2000/78/EC). (C-297/10 and C-298/10)

06-09-2011: ECJ Judgement C-108/10 (Scattolon, Italy)
A situation, in that a totality of staff is transferred from a public authority of the State to another corresponds to a transfer of an undertaking, as so contained in the Acquired Rights Directive (77/187/EEC) and (2001/23/EC). (C-108/10)

21-07-2011: ECJ Judgement C-159/10 and C-160/10 (Fuchs/Köhler, Germany)
The rules laid down in the Hessisches Beamtengesetz are compatible with Article 6 (1) of the Equal Treatment Directive (2000/78/EC), if they are necessary and adequate to pursue the goal of a balanced age distribution. (C-159/10 and C-160/10)

21-07-2011: ECJ Judgement C-104/10 (Kelly, Ireland)
Neither Directive. 97/80/EC on the burden of proof in sex discrimination cases nor the Equal Treatment Directive (2002/73/EC) generally entitle an applicant for vocational training to access information about the qualifications of the other applicants based on a suspicion of discrimination. However, it is for the national court to decide whether the aim of Directive 97/80/EC requires a disclosure of such facts in individual cases. (C-104/10)

07-07-2011: ECJ Judgement C-310/10 (Agafiţei a.o., Romania)
The Court has decided that the reference for a preliminary ruling concerning the compatibility of Article 15 of the Racial Equality Directive (2000/43/EC) and Article 17 of the Equal Treatment Directive (2000/78/EC) with a national ruling is inadmissible. (C-310/10)

19-05-2011: ECJ Judgement C-256/10 and C-261/10 (Barcenilla Fernández and Macedo Lozano, Spain)
 According to Articles 3, 5 (2), 6 and 7 of the Noise at Work Directive (2003/10/EC), an employer is obliged to reduce the daily noise exposure level to less than 85 by implementing technical and/or organisational measures. Providing hearing protectors is not sufficient. (C-256/10 and C-261/10)

10-05-2011: ECJ Judgement C-147/08 (Römer, Germany)
Supplementary pension payments for persons in a registered life partnership are within the meaning of Article 3 (3) of the Equal Treatment Directive (2000/78/EC), if they constitute pay as it is defined in Article 157 TFEU. (C-147/08)

07-04-2011: ECJ Order C-151/10 (Dai Cugini, Belgium)
National provisions that require employers to compile and maintain numerous social security documents fall within the scope of the Part-Time Work Directive (97/81/EC) if it is ensured, that part time workers are not treated unequal. (C-151/10)

07-04-2011: ECJ Order C-519/09 (May, Germany)
An employee who is subject to staff regulations in a public law body whose autonomous regulations refer to the provisions applicable to public servants, falls within the scope of Article 7 (1) and (2) of the Working Time Directive (2003/88/EC). (C.519/09)

07-04-2011: ECJ Judgement C-305/10 (Commission v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg)
By desisting to impose all required obligations, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has breached its obligations of the Railway Working Conditions Directive (2005/47/EC). (C-305/10)

18-03-2011: ECJ Order C-273/10 (Montoya Medina, Spain)
Clause 4 of the Framework Agreement annexed to the Fixed Term Work Directive (1999/70/EC) contradicts a national legislation which penalizes post-doctoral assistant lecturers with fixed-term contracts concerning a length-of-service supplement, although their situation is comparable to post-doctoral lecturers with contracts of indefinite duration. (C-273/70)

10-03-2011: ECJ Judgement C-109/09 (Deutsche Lufthansa, Germany)
In order to be compatible with Clause 5 of the Framework Agreement annexed to the Fixed-Term Work Directive the precondition stipulated in the old version of Paragraph 14(3) of the Law on part-time employment and fixed-term employment contracts (Gesetz über Teilzeitarbeit und befristete Arbeitsverträge), according to which “a close objective connection with a previous employment contract of indefinite duration concluded with the same employer” must not exist, needs to be interpreted as referring to situations where although a fixed-term contract is not immediately preceded by a contract of indefinite duration with the same employer and an considerable period of time separates those contracts, there has been an uninterrupted succession of fixed-term contracts during this period. [Since the amendment of the law of 01.05.2007 this condition does not exist anymore.] (C-109/09)

10-03-2011: ECJ Judgement C-477/09 (Defossez, France)
In case of habitual employment of an employee in a Member State other than the state in which the employer is established, the guarantee institution which according to Article 3 of the Employer Insolvency Directive (original Directive 80/987/EEC) is liable for the employer’s obligations in case of insolvency is the one in the Member State where the employer is established. It is possible for national legislation to deviate from this principle so long as employee protection is secured. (C-477/09)

07-03-2011: ECJ Judgement C-326/09 (Commission v Poland)
The Court determines that the Republic of Poland has failed to comply its obligations under the Gender Directive (2004/113/EC) by not adopting the necessary laws, regulations and administrative provisions within the designated implementation period. (C-326/09)

04-03-2011: ECJ Order C-258/10 (Grigore, Romania)
The time during which a forester is required to carry out warden duties in a specific section of the forest for which he is liable in terms of any damage in the area under his control constitutes ‘working time’ within the meaning of Article 2 (1) of the Working Time Directive (2003/88/EC), if he is required to observe the area and be on call in case his employer requests him to perform tasks. (C-258/10)

03-03-2011: ECJ Judgement C-235/10 to C-239/10 (Claes, Luxembourg)
The scope of application of Articles 1 to 3 of the Collective Redundancies Directive (98/59/EC) also includes cases where the termination of activities of an employer is due to a judicial decision based on the grounds of insolvency even if the national law provides for an automatic termination of employment contracts in such circumstances. (C-235/10 – C-239/10)

01-03-2011: ECJ Judgement C-236/09 (Association Belge des Consommateurs Test-Achats and Others, Belgium)
Article 5 (2) of the Gender Directive (2004/113/EC) is invalid. (C-236-09)

10-02-2011: ECJ Judgement C-30/10 (Andersson, Schweden)
A national provision, which in case of the insolvency of the employer, excludes outstanding claims for remuneration of employees who owned at least an essential part of the undertaking within the six months preceding the application for insolvency, is not contrary to Article 12(c) of the Employer Insolvency Directive 2008/94/EC. (C-30/10)

03-02-2011: ECJ Order C-230/10 (Saenz Morales, Spain)
After decisions C-444/09 and C-456/09 (Gavieiro Gavieiro) were forwarded to the national court by the Court of Justice, the Juzgado Contencioso-Administrativo de Almería decided to withdraw its reference for a preliminary ruling. Therefore, Case C-230/10 has been removed from the register. (C-230/10)

20-01-2011: ECJ Judgement C-463/09 (CLECE, Spain)
The case in which a Town Hall assumes the cleaning of its own premises and for which new staff are hired, does not fall within the scope of the Acquired Rights Directive (2001/23/EC). (C-463/09)

18-01-2011: ECJ Order C-272/10 (Berkizi-Nikolakaki, Greece)
Clause 8(3) of the Framework Agreement on fixed-term work, which has been annexed to Fixed Term Work Directive 1999/70/EC, is not breached if a two-month deadline is included in national legislation to convert a fixed-term contract into an open-ended contract, when no disadvantage or exclusion ensues. (C-272/10)

22-12-2010: ECJ Judgement C-444/09 and C-456/09 (Gavieiro Gavieiro, Spain)
A length-of-service increment as an employment condition is covered by Clause 4 (1) of the Framework Agreement annexed to the Fixed Term Work Directive (1999/70/EC), i.e., fixed-term workers can contest less favourable treatment without objective justifications. (C-444/09 and C-456/09)

25-11-2010: ECJ Judgement C-429/09 (Fuß, Germany)
A worker in the public sector who has worked more than the maximum weekly working time of 48 hours as provided in Article 6 (b) of the Working Time Directive (2003/88/EC) can claim reparation of loss or damages based on state liability for breaching EU law, which may neither be conditional on the existence of a fault of the state, nor on a prior application of the worker. (C-429/09)

18-11-2010 ECJ Judgement C-250/09 and C-268/09 (Georgiev, Romania)
A provision that compulsorily retires university professors when they reach the age of 68 and only employ them beyond the age of 65 by means of fixed-term one-year contracts does not violate the Equal Treatment Direction (2000/78/EC) as long as the provision pursues a legitimate aim to employment and labour market policy. (C-250/09 and C-268/09)

18-11-2010: ECJ Judgement C-356/09 (Kleist, Austria)
A national regulation that allows employers to dismiss employees who have acquired the right to a retirement pension constitutes a direct discrimination on the grounds of sex according to Article 3 (1) (c) of the Equal Treatment Directive (76/207/EEC, amended by 2002/73/EC), if women obtain that right five years before men do. (C-356/09)

11-11-2010: ECJ Order C-20/10 (Vino, Italy)
Clause 8 point 3 of the Framework Agreement annexed to the Fixed-Term Work Directive is to be interpreted as not precluding a national legislation which allows for an employer to conclude a first or single fixed-term employment contract with an employee without indicating any objective grounds which justify a fixed-term contract. (C-20/10)

11-11-2010: ECJ Judgement C-232/09 (Danosa, Latvia)
A member of a capital company’s Board of Directors, who provides services to that company and is an integral part of it, must be regarded as an employee with reference to the Protection of Pregnant Workers Directive (92/85/EEC), if that activity is carried out, for some time, under the direction or supervision of another body of that company and if, in return, the Board Member receives remuneration. (C-232/09)

21-10-2010: ECJ Judgement C-242/09 (Albron Catering, Netherlands)
In case of a transfer of undertakings, a group company that de facto employs an employee without being the employing party to the employment contract may constitute the transferor in terms of Article 2(1)(a)of Directive 2001/23/EC, even if another undertaking belonging to the group represents the contractual employer. (C-242/09)

21-10-2010: ECJ Judgement C-227/09 (Accardo and Others, Italy)
The scope of application of Article 17(3) of the Working Time Directive is not directly related to Article 17(2), implying that derogations with reference to Article 17(3) can also be concluded with regard to professions that are not referred to in Article 17(2). Furthermore, one cannot rely upon such derogations against individuals if the relevant provisions allowing for this (Article 17 of the Working Time Directive and Articles 17/18 of the Organisation of Working Time Directive) have not yet been transposed into national law. (C-227/09)

14-10-2010: ECJ Judgement C-428/09 (Union syndicale "Solidaires Isère", France)
Employment contracts for casual and seasonal activities in holiday and leisure centres with a maximum of 80 working days per annum lie within the scope of the Working Time Directive (2003/88/EC), but national legislation which restricts the activity carried out under such contracts does not meet the conditions stipulated in Article 17 (2) of that Directive. (C-428/09)

14-10-2010: ECJ Judgement C-243/09 (Fuß, Germany)
Article 6 (b) of the Working Time Directive (2003/88/EC) precludes national rules, which allow a public-sector employer to transfer a worker compulsorily to another service on the ground that that worker has requested compliance with the maximum average weekly working time. (C-243/09)

12-10-2010: ECJ Judgement C-45/09 (Rosenbladt, Germany)
Article 6 (1) of the Equal Treatment Directive (2000/78/EC) does not preclude a national provision or collective framework agreement which terminates the employment contracts of employees who have reached the retirement age, when the measure is justified by a legitimate, appropriate and necessary aim. (C-45/09)

12-10-2010: ECJ Judgement C-499/08 (Andersen, Denmark)
Articles 2 and 6 of the Equal Treatment Directive (200/78/EC) preclude a national regulation, according to which an employee with a long-time seniority is not being paid a statutory compensation, when he is entitled to receive an old age pension after his dismissal. (C-499/08)

07-10-2010: ECJ Judgement C-224/09 (Nussbaumer, Italy)
Article 3 (1) of Directive 92/57/EEC of Health and Safety on Construction Sites opposes national legislation that does not require the presence of a coordinator in case of private work on a construction site involving several enterprises and where no planning permission is necessary.(C-224/09)

01-10-2010: ECJ Order C-3/10 (Affatato, Italy)
Clause 5 of the Framework Agreement annexed to the Fixed-Term Work Directive (1999/70/EC) does not preclude a national legislation which prohibits the conversion to an indefinite contract in the event of abuse of successive fixed-term employment contracts by a public sector, when other effective measures are in place to avoid and penalise the misuse. (C-3/10)

30-09-2010: ECJ Judgement C-104/09 (Roca Álvarez, Spain)
Article 2 (1), (3) and (4) and Article 5 of the Equal Treatment Directive (76/207/EEC) must be interpreted as precluding a national legislation, which recognizes only employed mothers without any terms but not employed fathers as holders of an individual right to paid time off work. (C-104/09)

16-09-2010: ECJ Judgement C-149/10 (Chatzi, Greece)
Clause 2.1 of the Parental Leave Directive (96/34/EC) cannot be interpreted as creating in parallel a right to parental leave for the child, so that, if twins have been born two periods of parental leave must be granted. (C-149/10)

15-09-2010: ECJ Order C-386/09 (Briot, Belgium)
The non-renewal of a fixed-term contract that has ended prior to a transfer does not constitute a breach of the prohibition of a dismissal based on transfers of undertakings in accordance with Article 4 (1) of the Transfer of Undertakings Directive (2001/23/EC), since this provision is only applicable where an existing contract of employment subsists. (C-386/09)

08-07-2010: ECJ Judgement C-246/09 (Bulicke, Germany)
Article 9 of the Equal Treatment Directive (2000/78/EC) does not preclude a national legislation under which a victim of discrimination in recruitment must make a claim against the perpetrator of that discrimination within two months. (C-246/09)

01-07-2010: ECJ Judgement C-471/08 (Parviainen, Finland)
Article 11(1) of the Protection of Pregnant Workers Directive (92/85/EEC) does not entitle a pregnant worker, who has been temporarily transferred to a different work position due to her pregnancy in accordance with Article 5(2) of the same Directive, to be paid the same remuneration she received prior to the transfer. However, such workers remain entitled to pay components or supplementary allowances relating to their professional status, e.g., allowances linked to seniority, length of service or professional qualifications. (C-471/08)

01-07-2010: ECJ Judgement C-194/08 (Gassmayr, Austria)
Article 11(1) of the Protection of Pregnant Workers Directive (92/85/EEC) does not preclude national legislation which provides for the entitlement of a pregnant worker to remuneration during temporary leave which is equivalent to the average pay calculated on the basis of a reference period prior to the beginning of her pregnancy, with the exception of the on-call duty allowance. Accordingly, Articles 11(2) and (3) of the respective Directive allow for corresponding national legislation regarding remuneration during maternity leave. (C-194/08)

24-06-2010: ECJ Judgement C-98/09 (Sorge, Italy)
A domestic legislation, which does not impose an obligation for the employer to specify both the name of the replaced worker and the reasons for his/ her replacement within the scope of fixed-term contracts, is compatible with Clause 8 (3) of the Framework Agreement on Fixed-Term Work annexed to the Fixed-Term Work Directive (1999/70/EC). (C-98/09)

10-06-2010: ECJ Judgement C-395/08 and C-396/08 (Bruno and Pettini, Italy)
Clause 4 of the Framework Agreement annexed to the Part-Time Work Directive (97/81/EC) does preclude a national provision, which, for vertical-cyclical disregards periods not worked in calculating the period of service required to qualify for a pension without objective grounds. (C-395/08 and C-396/08)

22-04-2010: ECJ Judgment C-486/08 (Zentralbetriebsrat der Landeskrankenhäuser Tirols, Austria)
Clause 2.6 of the Framework Agreement on Parental Leave annexed to the Parental Leave Directive (96/34/EC) must be interpreted as precluding a national provision, under which workers lose their right to paid annual leave after taking parental leave. (C-486/08)

11-02-2010: ECJ Judgement C-405/08 (Holst, Denmark)
Directive 2002/14/EC for informing and consulting employees can be transposed by a collective agreement, which also covers groups of employees who aren’t bound by the collective agreement. (C-405/08)

04-02-2010: ECJ Judgement C-186/09 (Commission vs. United Kingdom, England)
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland have failed to fulfil their obligations under the Gender Directive (2004/113/EC) by not adopting all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with the Directive. (Case C-186/09)

19-01-2010: ECJ Judgement C-555/07 (Kücükdeveci, Germany)
National regulations providing that periods of employment completed by an employee before reaching the age of 25 are not taken into account when calculating the notice period for dismissal are not in line with the principles stated in the Equal Treatment Directive (2000/78/EC). (C-555/07)

12-01-2010: ECJ Judgement C-341/08 (Petersen, Germany)
National legislation may not set a maximum age until when panel dentists are allowed to practice, if the sole aim of that measure is to protect the health of patients against the decline in performance of dentists who are older than the maximum age, since that age limit does not apply to non-panel dentists. Such a measure is contradictory to Article 2 (5) of the Equal Treatment Directive (2000/78/EC. (C-341/08)

12-01-2010: ECJ Judgement C-229/08 (Wolf, Germany)
National legislation may set the maximum age for the recruitment to intermediate career posts in the fire service at 30 years. Such legislation is not contradictory to Article 4 (1) of the Equal Treatment Directive (2000/78/EC). (C-229/08)

10-12-2009: ECJ Judgement C-323/08 (Rodríguez Mayor and Others, Spain)
National legislation may determine that the termination of several contracts of employment as a result of the death of the employer is not a collective redundancy. This is not contradictory to Directive 98/59/EC on Collective Redundancies. (C-323/08)

23-11-2009: ECJ Order C-162/08 (Lagoudakis, Greece)
According to clause 5 of the Framework Agreement on Fixed Term Work Directive (1999/70/EC) Member States may adopt measures to prevent the misuse of successive fixed-term employment contracts or relationships, even if an equivalent legal measure already existed under national law before the Directive entered into force. (C-162/08)

29-10-2009: ECJ Judgement C-63/08 (Pontin, Luxemburg)
National legislation which provides a specific remedy regarding the prohibition of dismissal of pregnant workers or workers who have recently given birth or are breastfeeding may introduce procedural rules specific to that remedy, as long as those rules are not less favourable than those governing similar domestic measures and are not framed in such a way as to render the exercise of those rights practically impossible.