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.

DOI: 10.5553/EELC/187791072022007003033

European Employment Law CasesAccess_open

Pending Cases

Case C-496/22, Collective Redundancies

EI – v – SC Brink’s Cash Solutions SRL, reference lodged by the Curtea de Apel București (Romania) on 22 July 2022

Keywords Collective Redundancies, Juridisch, Arbeidsrecht, Europees recht (EU Recht)
DOI
Show PDF Show fullscreen
Statistics Citation
This article has been viewed times.
This article been downloaded 0 times.
Suggested citation
, "Case C-496/22, Collective Redundancies", European Employment Law Cases, 3, (2022):164-165

Dit artikel wordt geciteerd in

      1. Do [the first subparagraph of] Article 1[(1)(b)] and Article 6 of Council Directive 98/59/EC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies, read in the light of recitals 2 and 6 of the preamble to that directive, preclude national legislation which allows an employer not to consult the workers affected by a collective redundancy procedure since they have neither appointed representatives nor a legal obligation to appoint them?

      2. Are [the first subparagraph of] Article 1[(1)(b)] and Article 6 of Council Directive 98/59/EC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies, read in the light of recitals 2 and 6 of the preamble to that directive, to be interpreted as meaning that, in the circumstances described above, the employer is required to inform and consult all the employees affected by the collective redundancy procedure?


Print this article