GENERAL NOTICE

In January 2025, this online platform will be integrated into Boomportaal (www.boomportaal.nl), after which this platform will be discontinued. From that moment on, this URL will automatically redirect to Boomportaal.

Search articles of European Employment Law Cases
DOI: 10.5553/EELC/187791072019004001025

European Employment Law CasesAccess_open
Rulings

ECJ 28 February 2019, case C-579/17 (BUAK), Social insurance

BUAK Bauarbeiter-Urlaubs- u. Abfertigungskasse – v – Gradbeništvo Korana d.o.o., Austrian case
Keywords Social insurance
DOI 10.5553/EELC/187791072019004001025
Show PDF Show fullscreen
Abstract Statistics Citation
This article has been viewed times.
This article been downloaded 0 times.
Suggested citation
, "ECJ 28 February 2019, case C-579/17 (BUAK), Social insurance", European Employment Law Cases, 1, (2019):63-63
Download RIS Download BibTex

Dit artikel wordt geciteerd in

    • Questions

      Must Article 1 of Regulation No 1215/2012 be interpreted as meaning that an action for payment of wage supplements in respect of annual leave pay brought by a body governed by public law against an employer, in connection with the posting of workers to a Member State where they do not have their habitual place of work, or in the context of the provision of labour in that Member State, or against an employer established outside of the territory of that Member State in connection with the employment of workers who have their habitual place of work in that Member State, falls within the scope of application of that regulation?

    • Ruling

      Article 1 of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that an action for payment of wage supplements in respect of annual leave pay brought by a body governed by public law against an employer, in connection with the posting of workers to a Member State where they do not have their habitual place of work, or in the context of the provision of labour in that Member State, or against an employer established outside of the territory of that Member State in connection with the employment of workers who have their habitual place of work in that Member State, falls within the scope of application of that regulation, in so far as the modalities for bringing such an action do not infringe the rules of general law and, in particular, do not exclude the possibility for the court ruling on the case to verify the merits of the information on which the establishment of that claim is based, which is a matter to be determined by the referring court.


Print this article
Contents