Search result: 821 articles

x
The search results will be filtered on:
Journal European Employment Law Cases x
Rulings

ECJ 25 February 2021, Case C-129/20 (Caisse pour l’avenir des enfants (Emploi à la naissance)), Maternity and Parental Leave

XI – v – Caisse pour l’avenir des enfants, Luxembourg case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2021
Keywords Maternity and Parental Leave
Abstract

    While Member States can require that a parent has been uninterruptedly employed during the year prior to the start of the parental leave, they cannot require that s/he was employed during when the child was born or adopted.

Rulings

ECJ 17 March 2021, Case C-652/19 (Consulmarketing), Fixed-Term Work, Collective Redundancies

KO – v – Consulmarketing SpA , Italian Case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2021
Keywords Fixed-Term Work, Collective Redundancies
Abstract

    Italian regulations regarding collective redundancies found outside scope of Directive 98/59 and hence cannot be assessed against articles 20 and 30 of the Charter. Transitional scheme regarding conversion of fixed-term contracts into contracts for an indefinite term not found contrary to Clause 4 of the Framework Agreement on Fixed-Term Work (Directive 1999/70). Unfortunately, no English version of the judgment is available.

    In 2014, the ECJ was presented with a preliminary reference from the District Court in Kolding on the matter of whether EU law provides protection against discrimination on grounds of obesity with regard to employment and occupation. Following the ECJ’s ruling, first the District Court and later the High Court found that an employee’s obesity as such did not constitute a disability within the meaning of Directive 2000/78/EC establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation since his obesity had not constituted a limitation or inconvenience in the performance of his job.


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

    On 16 December 2020, the Supreme Court of Lithuania (Cassation Court) delivered a ruling in a case where an employee claimed that the employer, JSC ‘Lithuanian Railways’, did not apply the regulations of the company’s employer-level collective agreement and did not pay a special bonus – an anniversary benefit (i.e. a benefit paid to employees on reaching a certain age) – because the employee was not a member of the trade union which had signed the collective agreement. According to the employee, she was discriminated against because of her membership of another trade union, i.e membership of the ‘wrong’ trade union.
    The Supreme Court held that combatting discrimination under certain grounds falls within the competence and scope of EU law, but that discrimination on the grounds of trade union membership is not distinguished as a form of discrimination. Also, the Court ruled that in this case (contrary to what the employee claimed in her cassation appeal) Article 157 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is not applicable because it regulates the prohibition of discrimination on other (sex) grounds. Moreover, the Court found that there was no legal basis for relying on the relevant case law of the ECJ which provides clarification on other forms of discrimination, but not on discrimination based on trade union membership.


Vida Petrylaitė
Vida Petrylaitė is an associate professor at Vilnius university.
Pending Cases

Case C-58/21, Social Insurance

FK – v – Rechtsanwaltskammer Wien

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2021
Keywords Social Insurance

    According to German law, leave entitlements of an employee shall in principle expire at the end of the calendar year or a permissible carryover period. However, based on the case law of the ECJ, this shall only apply if the employer has previously enabled and summoned the employee to take leave and the employee has nevertheless not taken it. But what happens if an employee is incapacitated for work for a longer period of time and therefore is unable to take his or her annual leave? Does the employer also have to inform this employee about their leave entitlement? The Federal Labour Court (Bundesarbeitsgericht, ‘BAG’) recently had to deal with this question in two cases and now the ECJ will have to address this matter. This is because the BAG has asked the ECJ to decide whether and when an employee’s entitlement to paid leave can expire if an employee loses their ability to work during the course of the leave year, while the employee could have taken at least part of the annual leave before becoming incapacitated for work, but the employee was not properly informed by the employer about their leave entitlement.


Katharina Gorontzi
Katharina Gorontzi is an attorney-at-law at Luther Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH.

Nina Stephan
Nina Stephan is an attorney-at-law at Luther Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH.

Jule Rosauer
Jule Rosauer is a legal trainee at Luther Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH.

    The Vaslui Tribunal has recently annulled an individual dismissal decision issued during the state of alert in Romania due to formalities which had not been observed by the employer. While the judge invested with determining the matter limited their analysis to the elements contained in the individual dismissal decision, the judicial assistant ascertained, within a competing opinion, that the dismissal decision should have been annulled for other reasons, namely for the fact that, in reality, the employer had implemented a collective redundancy process without observing the procedure and employees’ rights in the event of such dismissal. Relying on the provisions of Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies, the judicial assistant has made an exhaustive analysis of the conditions required for the existence of a collective dismissal.
    While the competing opinion does not have the same effect as a court ruling, it is part of the judicial procedure and, from this perspective, the independence and impartiality of all the members of the court and their obedience solely to the law is maintained.


Andreea Suciu
Andreea Suciu is Managing Partner of Suciu I The Employment Law Firm.

Andreea Serban
Andreea Serban is an attorney-at-law at Suciu I The Employment Law Firm.
Rulings

ECJ 10 March 2021, Case C-739/19 (An Bord Pleanála), Other Forms of Free Movement

VK – v – An Bord Pleanála, Irish Case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2021
Keywords Other Forms of Free Movement
Abstract

    In principle, a Member State can require an attorney-at-law from another Member State to cooperate with a local attorney-at-law during litigation, but a general obligation not taking the experience of the visiting laywer into account would go beyond what is necessary in order to attain the objective of the proper administration of justice

Rulings

ECJ 17 December 2020, case C-218/19 (Onofrei), Work and Residence Permit

Adina Onofrei – v – Conseil de l’ordre des avocats au barreau de Paris, Bâtonnier de l’ordre des avocats au barreau de Paris, Procureur général près la cour d’appel de Paris, French case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2021
Keywords Work and Residence Permit
Abstract

Rulings

ECtHR 17 December 2020, application no. 73544/14 (Novaković), Age Discrimination, Race, Nationality Discrimination, Other Fundamental Rights

Mile Novaković – v – Croatia

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2021
Keywords Age Discrimination, Race, Nationality Discrimination, Other Fundamental Rights
Abstract

    Unjustified dismissal of Serbian ethnic origin teacher for failing to use standard Croatian in class, considered unable to adapt due to pre-retirement age.

Rulings

ECJ 8 December 2020, case C-620/18 (Hungary v Parliament and Council), Posting of Workers and Expatriates

Hungary – v – European Parliament and Council of the European Union, EU Case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2021
Keywords Posting of workers and Expatriates
Abstract

    Denial of action to annul provisions of Directive 2018/957.

Case Reports

2021/4 Budget considerations can justify indirect discrimination (UK)

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2021
Keywords Discrimination General, Age Discrimination
Authors Carolyn Soakell
AbstractAuthor's information

    If an employer has a policy which is indirectly discriminatory and the employer’s aim is no more than saving money, the Court of Appeal (CA) has ruled that this cannot justify the discrimination. However, needing to balance the books can potentially be a valid justification for indirect discrimination.


Carolyn Soakell
Carolyn Soakell is a partner at Lewis Silkin LLP.
Rulings

ECJ 8 December 2020, case C-626/18 (Republic of Poland v Parliament and Council), Posting of Workers and Expatriates

Republic of Poland – v – European Parliament and Council of the European Union, EU Case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2021
Keywords Posting of workers and Expatriates
Abstract

    Denial of action to annul provisions of Directive 2018/957.

Pending Cases

Case C-576/20, Social Insurance, Pensions

CC – v – Pensionsversicherungsanstalt, reference lodged by the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) on 4 November 2020

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2021
Keywords Social Insurance, Pensions
Pending Cases

Case C-86/21, Social Insurance

Gerencia Regional de Salud de Castilla y León – v – Delia, reference lodged by the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla y León (Spain) on 11 February 2021

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2021
Keywords Social Insurance
Rulings

ECJ 21 January 2021, C-843/19 (INSS), Gender Discrimination, Pension

Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social (INSS) – v – BT

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2021
Keywords Gender Discrimination, Pension
Abstract

    Requiring a minimum pension amount for allowing early retirement is not contrary to Article 4(1) of Directive 79/7 even if it puts female workers at a particular disadvantage, provided that this is justified by legitimate reasons of social policy which are not related to gender discrimination.

Pending Cases

Case C-677/20, Information and Consultation, Miscellaneous

Industriegewerkschaft Metall (IG Metall) and ver.di – Vereinte Dienstleistungsgewerkschaft, reference lodged by the Bundesarbeitsgericht (Germany) on 11 December 2020

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2021
Keywords Information and Consultation, Miscellaneous

    A host state must grant a Union citizen a reasonable period to find a job.

Case Reports

2021/9 AGET Iraklis: another belated victory for the employer (GR)

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2021
Keywords Information & Consultation, Collective Redundancies
Authors Effie Mitsopoulou
AbstractAuthor's information

    The Supreme Court of Greece has clarified that the validity of terminations is not affected by the lack of consultation with the employees’ representatives, as per Directive 2002/14/EC on a general framework for informing and consulting employees. In case of non-compliance with such obligation, alternative administrative or judicial measures can be provided by the Member States. It further reiterated that the expediency and necessity of the company’s business decision to suddenly interrupt its plant operation cannot be subject to judicial control.


Effie Mitsopoulou
Effie Mitsopoulou is an attorney-at-law at Effie Mitsopoulou Law Office.
Pending Cases

Case C-713/20, Social Insurance, Temporary Agency Work

X,Y – v – Raad van bestuur van de Sociale verzekeringsbank, reference lodged by the Centrale Raad van Beroep (the Netherlands) on 24 December 2020

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2021
Keywords Social Insurance, Temporary Agency Work
Showing 1 - 20 of 821 results
« 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 41 42
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.