CJEU decisions:

• Judgment of the Court of 13 January 2004, Gesamtbetriebsrat der Kühne & Nagel AG & Co. KG v Kühne & Nagel AG & Co. KG, Case C-440/00.

• Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 15 July 2004, Betriebsrat der Firma ADS Anker GmbH v ADS Anker GmbH, Case C-349/01.

• Judgment of the Court of 8 June 1994, Commission of the European Communities v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Case C-382/92.

 Questions:

Depict the scope of the European works council directive.

Describe national level information and consultation provisions’ impact on the U.K. legal system.

CJEU decisions:

• Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work.

• Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 22 May 2003, Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of the Netherlands, Case C-441/01.

• Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 5 October 2004, Bernhard Pfeiffer (C-397/01), Wilhelm Roith (C-398/01), Albert Süß (C-399/01), Michael Winter (C-400/01), Klaus Nestvogel (C-401/01), Roswitha Zeller (C-402/01) and Matthias Döbele (C-403/01) v Deutsches Rotes Kreuz, Kreisverband Waldshut eV, Joined cases C-397/01 to C-403/01.

• Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 10 September 2009, Francisco Vicente Pereda v Madrid Movilidad SA, Case C-277/08.

• Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 November 2011, KHS AG v Winfried Schulte, Case C-214/10.

Questions

Regarding directive 89/391, how come employers’ obligations are to ensure workers’ safety?

Explain the connection between health and safety with the Directive 2003/88/EC. What legal value has the 48-hour upper limit?

How holidays and sick or maternity leaves do combine?

CJEU decisions:

• Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 November 2005, Werner Mangold v Rüdiger Helm, Case C-144/04.

• Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 17 July 2008, S. Coleman v Attridge Law and Steve Law, Case C-303/06.

• Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 5 March 2009, The Queen, on the application of The Incorporated Trustees of the National Council for Ageing (Age Concern England) v Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, Case C-388/07.

Questions:

What are the implications of the recognition of the principle of non-discrimination in respect of age as a general principle of Community law?

Describe situations in which differences in treatment on grounds of age do not constitute a legal discrimination.

What is associative discrimination?

CJEU decisions:

• Judgment of the Court of 12 February 1974, Giovanni Maria Sotgiu v Deutsche Bundespost, Case 152-73.

• Judgment of the Court of 31 March 1981, J.P. Jenkins v Kingsgate (Clothing Productions) Ltd, Case 96/80.

• Judgment of the Court of 27 October 1993, Dr. Pamela Mary Enderby v Frenchay Health Authority and Secretary of State for Health, Case C-127/92.

• Judgment of the Court of 9 February 1999, Regina v Secretary of State for Employment, ex parte Nicole Seymour-Smith and Laura Perez, Case C-167/97.

• Judgment of the Court of 13 May 1986, Bilka - Kaufhaus GmbH v Karin Weber von Hartz, Case 170/84.

• Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 13 July 1989, Ingrid Rinner-Kühn v FWW Spezial-Gebäudereinigung GmbH & Co. KG, Case 171/88.

• Judgment of the Court of 14 December 1995, Inge Nolte v Landesversicherungsanstalt Hannover, Case C-317/93.

Questions:

Describe the different techniques to establish an indirect discirmination.

Describe the different steps of comparison to establish sex-discrimination.

Describe the different levels of scrutiny over employer’s justifications.

CJEU decisions:

• Judgment of the Court of 21 September 1999, Albany International BV v Stichting Bedrijfspensioenfonds Textielindustrie, Case C-67/96.

• Judgment of the Court of 16 November 1995, Fédération Française des Sociétés d'Assurance, Société Paternelle-Vie, Union des Assurances de Paris-Vie and Caisse d'Assurance et de Prévoyance Mutuelle des Agriculteurs v Ministère de l'Agriculture et de la Pêche, Case C-244/94.

• Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 11 December 2007, International Transport Workers’ Federation and Finnish Seamen’s Union v Viking Line ABP and OÜ Viking Line Eesti, Case C-438/05.

• Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 18 December 2007, Laval un Partneri Ltd v Svenska Byggnadsarbetareförbundet, Svenska Byggnadsarbetareförbundets avdelning 1, Byggettan and Svenska Elektrikerförbundet, Case C-341/05.

• Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 3 April 2008, Dirk Rüffert v Land Niedersachsen, Case C-346/06.

• Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 June 2008, Commission of the European Communities v Grand Duchy of Luxemburg, Case C-319/06.

Questions:

1. Explain how the CJEU reconcile competition law and national labour law. More particularly, describe the european legal regime applied to collective agreements and to the principle of solidarity.

1. Describe the seminal “Viking quartet”[1] and its aftermath.Don’t forget to consult articles 1,2 and 3 of the Directive 96/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services.

CJEU decisions:

• Judgment of the Court of 6 June 2000, Roman Angonese v Cassa di Risparmio di Bolzano SpA, Case C-281/98.

• Judgment of the Court of 20 September 2001, Rudy Grzelczyk v Centre public d'aide sociale d'Ottignies-Louvain-la-Neuve, Case C-184/99.

• Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 8 March 2011, Gerardo Ruiz Zambrano v Office national de l’emploi (ONEm), Case C-34/09.

• Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 5 May 2011, Shirley McCarthy v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Case C-434/09.

• Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 15 November 2011, Murat Dereci and Others v Bundesministerium für Inneres, Case C-256/11.

Questions:

1. Describe the legal techniques used by the CJEU to ensure free movement of workers.

1. Explain European citizenship’s impact on Social security benefit.

1. Explain the “new shift” initiated by the Zambrano decision.

       I.            The evolution of EU “social” policy

A.     From Val Duchesse and on

B.     The nature and purpose of EU Social Policy

    II.            The specific law-making in the fields of social policy

A.     EU social dialogue

B.     The legislativ process

 III.            EU2020 strategies

A.     The lisbon strategy

B.     EU 2020

You are asked to read and analyse all Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) decisions refered to in this document. You have to answer questions on the ground of those decisions.

You will have to search CJEU decisions on the Internet at:

• http://eur-lex.europa.eu/fr/index.htm
• Or: http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/j_6/

Your homework consist on answering the questions for each lecture and handed it to your teacher. Homeworks start with unit 2.

Summary:

Unit 1: Introduction.

Unit 2 : Free movement of workers and european citizenship.

Unit 3: Labour law and the internal market.

Unit 4: Equality - discrimination on the ground of nationality and sex.

Unit 5: Equality - discrimination on the ground of age, sexual orientation, religious belief, handicap, race.

Unit 6: Health and safety and working conditions.

Unit 7: Collective labour law.