Search result: 648 articles

x
The search results will be filtered on:
Journal European Employment Law Cases x
ECJ Court Watch

Case C-46/17. Fixed-term work and equal treatment

Hubertus John – v – Freie Hansestadt Bremen, reference lodged by the German Landesarbeitsgericht Bremen on 30 January 2017

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 3 2017

    The period within which an employee can file a claim under the Regulations entitled “Contracts of Service for a Fixed Term” (which are Subsidiary Legislation under Maltese law) starts from when the employee became subject to less favourable treatment and not from when the employee could have known that the Regulations were being breached.


Matthew Brincat
Matthew Brincat is a partner with GANADO Advocates.
ECJ Court Watch

Case C-193/17. Fundamental rights

Cresco Investigation GmbH – v – Markus Achatzi, reference lodged by the German Oberster Gerichtshof on 13 April 2017

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 3 2017

    In an international road transport case the Dutch Appellate Court held that working from a given place is not relevant when applying the Posted Workers Directive.


Zef Even
Zef Even is a lawyer with SteensmaEven, www.steensmaeven.com, and professor at the Erasmus University Rotterdam.

Amber Zwanenburg
Amber Zwanenburg is a lecturer at the Erasmus University Rotterdam.
ECJ Court Watch

ECJ 18 July 2017, case C 566/15 (Erzberger), Free movement of workers

Konrad Erzberger – v – TUI AG, German case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 3 2017
Keywords Free movement of workers
Abstract

    The exclusion of employees of a group, employed outside of Germany, from the right to vote and stand as candidates in elections of employee representatives on the supervisory board of the German parent company, is not contrary to the free movement of workers.

ECJ Court Watch

Case C-60/17. Transfer of undertakings

Ángel Somoza Hermo – v – Esabe Vigilancia, S.A., Fondo de Garantía Salarial (FOGASA), reference lodged by the Spanish Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Galicia on 6 February 2017

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 3 2017
ECJ Court Watch

Case C-677/16. Fixed-term work

Lucía Montero Mateos – v – Agencia Madrileña de Atención Social de la Consejería de Políticas Sociales y Familia de la Comunidad Autónoma de Madrid, reference lodged by the Spanish Juzgado de lo Social No 33 de Madrid on 29 December 2016

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 3 2017
Case Reports

2017/26 What is a collective agreement? (DK)

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 3 2017
Keywords Collective labour law, Collective agreements
Authors Christian K. Clasen
AbstractAuthor's information

    On 2 June 2017, the Danish Eastern High Court decided that a statutory intervention by government was sufficient to enable derogation from the Working Time Directive (2003/88). The Directive can be derogated from by a collective agreement and although the statutory intervention was not a collective agreement, the High Court found that it was not inconsistent with that requirement.


Christian K. Clasen
Christian K. Clasen is a partner at Norrbom Vinding, Copenhagen.

    This case report concerns the lawfulness of a notified boycott against Holship Norge AS (‘Holship’) by the Norwegian Transport Workers’ Union (‘NTF’). In its decision, the Supreme Court considered whether the collective agreement exemption from competition law could be applied, and whether the boycott was unlawful pursuant to the right to freedom of establishment established by Article 31 of the EEA Agreement, cf. Article 101 of the Constitution and Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
    The boycott would prevent Holship’s staff from loading and unloading ships docked at the Port of Drammen. NTF’s purpose was to force Holship to enter into a collective agreement containing a priority of engagement clause, reserving loading and unloading work for dockworkers associated with the Administration Office for Dock Work in Drammen. The majority of the plenary Supreme Court found (10-7) that such boycott would be unlawful pursuant to section 2 of the Boycott Act. The dissent concerns the EEA rules.


Kurt Weltzien
Kurt Weltzien is a lawyer in NHO, which is the main representative organisation for Norwegian employers. He has a PhD on the thesis “Boycott in labour conflicts”. Kurt Weltzien also represented NHO in the Supreme Court in the case discussed in this case report.

Anne-Beth Engan
Anne-Beth Engan is an associate with Advokatfirmaet Selmer DA in Oslo.
Case Reports

2017/12 Court of Appeal rejects argument that Christmas strikes are unlawful under EU law (UK)

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2017
Keywords Collective labour law, industrial actions, unions
Authors Vince Toman and David Hopper
AbstractAuthor's information

    The Court of Appeal has confirmed that industrial action called with the object or purpose of infringing the cross-border freedom to establish and receive services would be unlawful. It rejected the argument that industrial action would be unlawful if it made it unattractive for foreign companies to operate in the UK or if cross-border services might potentially be disrupted. These wider tests would be inconsistent with European case law on the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’) and would be incompatible with proper protection of the right to strike.


Vince Toman

David Hopper
Vince Toman and David Hopper are respectively Head of the Trade Union and Collective Employment Law Group and Senior Associate at Lewis Silkin LLP.
ECJ Court Watch

ECJ 27 April 2017, case C-680/15 (Asklepios Kliniken), Transfer of undertakings

Asklepios Kliniken Langen-Seligenstadt GmbH and Asklepios Dienstleistungsgesellschaft mbH – v – Ivan Felja and Vittoria Graf, German case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2017
Keywords Transfer of undertakings, employment terms
Abstract

    ‘Dynamic’ referral clauses have effect after the transfer of an undertaking, if national law provides for the possibility for the transferee to make changes both consensually and unilaterally.

Article

2017/11 Transposition of the ‘enforcement’ directive into Belgian law

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2017
Keywords Private international law, posting of workers and expatriates, Free movement, minimum wage/social dumping
Authors Gautier Busschaert
AbstractAuthor's information

    This article briefly describes the main measures adopted by Belgium in transposing the EU Directive 2014/67 of 15 May 2014 into national law.


Gautier Busschaert
Gautier Busschaert is a lawyer at Van Olmen & Wynant in Brussels.
Case Reports

2017/19 Sureties for alleged breaches of the Austrian Anti-Wage and Social Dumping Law (AT)

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2017
Keywords Minimum wage/social dumping, Posted Workers Directive
Authors Hans Georg Laimer and Lukas Wieser
AbstractAuthor's information

    A surety can be imposed on an Austrian contractor retaining the services of a foreign company, if the foreign company is accused of breaching the Austrian Anti-Wage and Social Dumping Law and if the enforcement of a penalty outside Austria would be extremely difficult or impossible. Any risk assessment of this should based on not only what law is in place but whether it is routinely being applied. The Austrian Supreme Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgerichtshof) ruled that a surety should be imposed on a domestic contractor in relation to violations by a Hungarian suspect, even though law enforcement regulations are in place between Austria and Hungary (but just not applied in practice).


Hans Georg Laimer

Lukas Wieser
Hans Georg Laimer and Lukas Wieser are respectively a partner and an attorney at Law at zeiler.partners Rechtsanwaelte GmbH in Vienna.
ECJ Court Watch

ECJ (Grand Chamber) 14 March 2017, case C-188/15 (Bougnaoui), Religious discrimination

Asma Bougnaoui and Association de défense des droits de l’homme (Association for the Defence of Human Rights) – v – Micropole SA, formerly Micropole Univers SA, French case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2017
Keywords Religious discrimination
Abstract

    The concept of a ‘genuine and determining occupational requirement’ within the meaning of Article 4 of Directive 2000/78 does not cover subjective considerations, such as the willingness of an employer to take account of customers’ wishes.

ECtHR Court Watch

ECtHR 28 March 2017, application no. 51706/11, Freedom of expression

Marunic – v – Croatia, Croatian case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2017
Keywords Freedom of expression
Abstract

    The employer had summarily dismissed the director of the company, on the basis that it had the right to protect its reputation and business interests against the criticisms she made in the media. What it failed to take into account was that she was simply responding to earlier criticisms by the employer in the media of her leadership. The expectation that the employee should not respond in the media would overstretch the employees’ duty of loyalty, contrary to Article 10 of the Convention – whereby the right to freedom of expression would protect against unreasonable demands of loyalty by the employer. On the facts, what the employee did was legitimate and within her right to freedom of expression.

    The rule has been confirmed again: the Fixed Term Employees (Prohibition on Discrimination) Law, Law 98(I)/2003 and EU Directive 1999/70 (the ‘Directive’) apply equally to all indefinite term contracts of both public and private sector employees and any remedy provided by the employer for failure to comply must be fair and equitable.


Panayiota Papakyriacou
Panayiota Papakyriacou is a lawyer at George Z. Georgiou & Associates LLC, www.gzg.com.cy.
Case Reports

2017/21 Legal rules for employers for monitoring employees in Slovakia (SK)

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2017
Keywords Privacy, Unfair dismissal
Authors Gabriel Havrilla and Richard Sanák
AbstractAuthor's information

    An employer can monitor an employee’s emails provided it has made it clear beforehand that it might do so. It is permissible for the employer to prohibit employees from using its electronical equipment for private use, but if the employer is going to check whether this rule was being complied with, it needs to have a significant reason to do so and must respect the principles of legality legitimacy and proportionality.


Gabriel Havrilla

Richard Sanák
Gabriel Havrilla and Richard Sanák are respectively managing partner and junior associate with law firm Legal Counsels s.r.o., www.legalcounsels.sk.

    A pregnant employee with no valid work permit in France does not benefit from protective legal provisions forbidding or restraining her termination.


Claire Toumieux

Susan Ekrami
Claire Toumieux and Susan Ekrami are a partner and associate with Allen & Overy LLP in Paris, www.allenovery.com.
ECJ Court Watch

Case C-653/16. Discrimination

Jitka Svobodová v Česká republika – Okresní soud v Náchodě, reference lodged by the Nejvyšší soud České republiky (Czech Republic) on 19 December 2016

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2017
ECJ Court Watch

ECJ (Grand Chamber) 14 March 2017, case C-157/15 (Achbita), Religious discrimination

Samira Achbita and the Centrum voor gelijkheid van kansen en voor racismebestrijding (Centre for Equal Opportunities and Opposition to Racism) – v – G4S Secure Solutions NV, Belgian case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2017
Keywords Religious discrimination
Abstract

    Company regulations that prohibit the visible wearing of political, philosophical or religious symbols do not discriminate directly on grounds of religion. A policy of projecting an image of neutrality is not indirectly discriminatory if pursued consistently and systematically.

Showing 421 - 440 of 648 results
1 2 18 19 20 22 24 25 26 32 33
You can search full text for articles by entering your search term in the search field. If you click the search button the search results will be shown on a fresh page where the search results can be narrowed down by category or year.