Search result: 37 articles

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

Case C-834/19, Part time work, fixed-term work

AV – v – Minister for Justice and the Italian Republic, reference lodged by the Tribunale di Vicenza (Italy) on 15 November 2019

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2020
Keywords Part time work, Fixed-term work
Case Law

2020/1 EELC’s review of the year 2019

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2020
Authors Ruben Houweling, Daiva Petrylaitė, Peter Schöffmann e.a.
Abstract

    Various of our academic board analysed employment law cases from last year. However, first, we start with some general remarks.


Ruben Houweling

Daiva Petrylaitė

Peter Schöffmann

Attila Kun

Francesca Maffei

Jean-Philippe Lhernould

Niklas Bruun

Jan-Pieter Vos

Luca Ratti

Anthony Kerr

Petr Hůrka

Michal Vrajík

Rulings

ECJ 5 November 2019, case C-192/18 (Commission – v – Poland), Gender Discrimination, Fair Trial

European Commission – v – Republic of Poland, EU Case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2019
Keywords Gender discrimination, Fair trial
Abstract

    The Court of Appeal (CA) has ruled that it was unlawful to discriminate against an employee because of a mistaken perception that she had a progressive condition which would make her unable to perform the full functions of the role in future.


Bethan Carney
Bethan Carney is a Managing Practice Development Lawyer at Lewis Silkin LLP.

    The Luxembourg Court of Appeal (Cour d’appel de Luxembourg) confirmed that an employee dismissed with notice and exempted from performing their work during the notice period is no longer bound by the non-competition duties arising from their loyalty obligation and can therefore engage in an employment contract with a direct competitor of their former employer during that exempted notice period. However, the Court of Appeal decided that, even if the former employee is in principle entitled to use the know-how and knowledge they acquired with their former employer, the poaching of clients during the notice period must, due to the facts and circumstances and in the light of the rules applicable in the financial sector, be considered as an unfair competition act and therefore constitutes serious misconduct justifying the termination of the employment contract with immediate effect.


Michel Molitor
Michel Molitor is the managing partner of MOLITOR Avocats à la Cour SARL in Luxembourg, www.molitorlegal.lu.

Régis Muller
Régis Muller is partner within the Employment, Pension & Immigration department of MOLITOR Avocats à la Cour SARL in Luxembourg, www.molitorlegal.lu.
Pending Cases

Case C-537/18, Age Discrimination, General Discrimination

YV – v – Krajowa Rada Sądownictwa, reference lodged by the Sąd Najwyższy (Poland) on 17 August 2018

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Case Reports

2019/20 How to interpret the Posting of Workers Directive in the cross-border road transport sector? Dutch Supreme Court asks the ECJ for guidance (NL)

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Keywords Private International Law, Posting of Workers and Expatriates, Applicable Law
Authors Zef Even and Amber Zwanenburg
AbstractAuthor's information

    In this transnational road transport case, the Dutch Supreme Court had to elaborate on the ECJ Koelzsch and Schlecker cases and asks for guidance from the ECJ on the applicability and interpretation of the Posting of 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 and PhD Candidate at the Erasmus University Rotterdam.
Pending Cases

Case C-668/18, Age Discrimination, Miscellaneous

BP – v – UNIPARTS sàrl, reference lodged by the Sąd Najwyższy (Poland) on 26 October 2018

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Pending Cases

Case C-658/18, Fixed-Term Work, Annual Leave

UX – v – Governo della Repubblica italiana, reference lodged by the Giudice di pace di Bologna (Italy) on 22 October 2018

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019

    Following an appeal by Uber against the Employment Appeal Tribunal’s (EAT) finding last year, which was featured in EELC 2018/9, that drivers engaged by Uber are ‘workers’ rather than independent contractors (reported in EELC 2018-1), the Court of Appeal (CA) has now upheld the EAT’s decision. The CA also upheld the finding of the Employment Tribunal (ET), which was featured in EELC 2017/10, that drivers are working when they are signed into the Uber app and ready to work (reported in EECL 2017-1). Uber has approximately 40,000 drivers (and about 3.5 million users of its mobile phone application in London alone) and so this decision has potentially significant financial consequences for the company.


Jemma Thomas
Jemma Thomas is a Senior Associate Solicitor at Lewis Silkin LLP.
Pending Cases

Case C-522/18, Age Discrimination, Miscellaneous

DŚ – v – Zakład Ubezpieczeń Społecznych Oddział w Jaśle, reference lodged by the Sąd Najwyższy (Poland) on 9 August 2018

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Law Review

2019/1 EELC’s review of the year 2018

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2019
Authors Ruben Houweling, Catherine Barnard, Filip Dorssemont e.a.
Abstract

    For the second time, various of our academic board analysed employment law cases from last year. However, first, we start with some general remarks.


Ruben Houweling

Catherine Barnard

Filip Dorssemont

Jean-Philippe Lhernould

Francesca Maffei

Niklas Bruun

Anthony Kerr

Jan-Pieter Vos

Luca Ratti

Daiva Petrylaite

Andrej Poruban

Stein Evju
Rulings

ECJ 6 November 2018, case C-619/16 (Kreuziger), Paid leave

Sebastian W. Kreuziger – v – Land Berlin, German case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2018
Keywords Paid leave
Abstract

    A worker cannot automatically lose the right to annual leave because s/he did not apply for it. The employer must have informed the employee about the opportunity to take leave adequately and in a timely way, and must be able to prove this has been done.

Pending cases

Case C-581/18, Age discrimination

YV, reference lodged by the Sąd Najwyższy (Poland) on 17 August 2018

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2018
Rulings

ECJ 4 October 2018, case C-12/17 (Dicu), Maternity and parental leave, Paid leave

Tribunalul Botoşani, Ministerul Justiţiei – v – Maria Dicu, Romanian case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2018
Keywords Maternity and parental leave, Paid leave
Abstract

    A period of parental leave does not count within the reference period for the purpose of determining an employee’s right to annual leave under Directive 2003/88/EC.

Rulings

ECJ 7 november 2018, case C-432/17 (O’Brien), Part-time work

Dermod Patrick O’Brien – v – Ministry of Justice, UK case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2018
Keywords Part-time work
Abstract

    Periods of service prior to the deadline for transposing Directive 97/81/EC (amended by Directive 98/23/EC) must be taken into account for the purpose of calculating the retirement pension entitlement.

    The Spanish Supreme Court has again ruled on the highly controversial question of whether limitations to the liability of a transferee established in a collective bargaining agreement (‘CBA’) in the context of a CBA-led transfer are valid, or whether they contravene the Spanish implementation of the Acquired Rights Directive.


Luis Aguilar
Luis Aguilar is an attorney-at-law at Eversheds Sutherland and an associate professor in Labour Law at IE University.
Case Reports

2018/9 Uber’s work status appeal rejected (UK)

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2018
Keywords Miscellaneous, Employment status
Authors Laetitia Cooke
AbstractAuthor's information

    Following an appeal by Uber against an employment tribunal (ET) finding last year, which was featured in EELC 2017/10, that its drivers are ‘workers’ and not self-employed contractors (reported in EELC 2017-1), the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has now upheld the ET’s original decision. The EAT rejected Uber’s arguments that it was merely a technology platform, as well as its statement that it did not provide transportation services. This decision is important as it means that Uber drivers are entitled to certain rights under UK law, such as the right to holiday pay, to the national minimum wage (NMW) and protection against detrimental treatment for ‘blowing the whistle’ against malpractice. Uber has approximately 40,000 drivers (and about 3.5 million users of its mobile phone application in London alone) and so this decision has potentially significant financial consequences for the company.


Laetitia Cooke
Laetitia Cooke is an Associate at Lewis Silkin LLP.
Case Reports

2018/7 ‘Ryanair’ after ‘Ryanair’: Crew member still left empty-handed? (NL)

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2018
Keywords Private international law, Competency, Applicable law
Authors Amber Zwanenburg
AbstractAuthor's information

    A Dutch first instance court applies the recent ECJ Ryanair ruling (C-168/16 and C-169/16) in another Ryanair private international law dispute. Even though the Dutch court accepted jurisdiction, it applied Irish law to the employees’ unfair termination claim.


Amber Zwanenburg
Amber Zwanenburg is a lecturer in labour law at the Erasmus University, Rotterdam.
Showing 1 - 20 of 37 results
« 1
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.