Search result: 11 articles

x
The search results will be filtered on:
Journal European Employment Law Cases x Year 2017 x
ECJ Court Watch

ECJ 14 September 2017, case C-168/16 and C-169/16 (Ryanair), Private international law

Sandra Nogueira and Others – v – Crewlink Ireland Ltd and Miguel José Moreno Osacar – v – Ryanair Designated Activity Company

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2017
Keywords Private international law
Abstract

    When determining the place from which airline cabin crewmembers habitually carry out their work, the concept of ‘home base’ is a significant indicator.

Case Reports

2017/31 Lawful positive discrimination in favour of women (FR)

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 3 2017
Keywords Discrimination (other), Positive discrimination
Authors Claire Toumieux and Susan Ekrami
AbstractAuthor's information

    Company agreement provisions granting a half-day of leave to female employees on International Women’s Day constitute lawful positive discrimination in favour of women.


Claire Toumieux
Claire Toumieux is a partner with Allen & Overy LLP in Paris (www.allenovery.com).

Susan Ekrami
Susan Ekrami is a senior associate with Allen & Overy LLP in Paris (www.allenovery.com).

    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

ECJ 27 April 2017, C-620/15 (A-Rosa Flussschiff), Free movement, social insurance

A-Rosa Flussschiff GmbH – v – Union de recouvrement des cotisations de sécurité sociale et d’allocations familiales d’Alsace (URSSAF), venant aux droits de l’URSSAF du Bas-Rhin and Sozialversicherungsanstalt des Kantons Graubünden, French case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2017
Keywords free movement: social insurance
Abstract

    An E101 certificate, issued by the institution designated by the competent authority of a Member State under Article 14(2)(a) of Regulation No 1408/71, is binding on both the social security institutions of the Member State in which the work is carried out and the courts of that Member State – even when it is found by those courts that the conditions under which the workers carried out their activities did not fall within the scope of the provisions of Regulation no 1408/71.

ECJ Court Watch

ECJ 2 March 2017, case C-496/15 (Eschenbrenner), Freedom of movement

Alphonse Eschenbrenner – v – Bundesagentur für Arbeit, German case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2017
Keywords Freedom of movement
ECJ Court Watch

ECJ 15 December 2016, joined cases C-401/15 to C-403/15 (Depesme), Free movement, social insurance

Noémie Depesme (C-401/15), Saïd Kerrou (C-401/15), Adrien Kauffmann (C-402/15) and Maxime Lefort (C-403/15) – v – Ministre de l’Enseignement supérieur et de la Recherche, Luxembourgian case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2017
Keywords Free movement, Social insurance
Abstract

    These cases concern the refusal by Luxembourg to grant financial aid to students studying in Luxembourg whilst living in France or Belgium, when they would be entitled to such aid under Regulation 492/2011 on free movement (pursuant to Article 45 TFEU), based on their family circumstances, were it not that the person employed in Luxembourg was not their father but their stepfather. The ECJ found in favour of the students.

ECtHR Court Watch

ECtHR 25 October 2016, application nos. 45197/13, 53000/13 and 73404/13, Diplomatic immunity in labour relations

Radunović and Others – v – Montenegro, Montenegronian case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2017
Keywords Diplomatic immunity in labour relations
Case Reports

2017/9 The influence of the threat of terrorism on the right to strike (NL)

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2017
Keywords Industrial action, Strike
Authors Ruben Houweling and Amber Zwanenburg
AbstractAuthor's information

    The Dutch Cantonal judge prohibited a strike because the safety of passengers could not be guaranteed. At the hearing, which took place a few days after the Berlin Christmas market attacks, weight was given to the threat of terrorism. Nor is this the first time the threat of terrorism has been explicitly referred to by a Dutch court in a case concerning the right to strike.


Ruben Houweling
Ruben Houweling and Amber Zwanenburg are respectively a professor and a lecturer of Labour Law at the Erasmus University Rotterdam.

Amber Zwanenburg
Showing all 11 results
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.