Zoekresultaat: 16 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases x
Case Law

Access_open 2021/1 EELC’s review of the year 2020

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 1 2021
Auteurs Ruben Houweling, Daiva Petrylaitė, Marianne Hrdlicka e.a.
Samenvatting

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


Ruben Houweling

Daiva Petrylaitė

Marianne Hrdlicka

Attila Kun

Luca Calcaterra

Francesca Maffei

Jean-Philippe Lhernould

Niklas Bruun

Jan-Pieter Vos

Luca Ratti

Andrej Poruban

Anthony Kerr

Filip Dorssemont
Article

Access_open 2020/27 Freedom of religion: a tale of two cities

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 3 2020
Trefwoorden Religious discrimination
Auteurs Filip Dorssemont
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Are the outcomes of the CJEU judgments on religious discrimination essentially different from the outcome of similar cases dealing with restrictions on the freedom of religion ruled by the ECtHR?


Filip Dorssemont
Filip Dorssemont is a Professor of Labour Law at Université catholique de Louvain and Guest Professor at Free University of Brussels.
Rulings

ECJ 22 January 2020, case C-177/18 (Baldonedo Martín), Fixed-term work, other forms of discrimination

Almudena Baldonedo Martín – v – Ayuntamiento de Madrid, Spanish case

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 1 2020
Trefwoorden Fixed-term work, Other forms of discrimination
Samenvatting

    The absence of severance compensation for interim civil servants is not contrary to Directive 1999/70.

Case Reports

2019/41 A question of age discrimination (NL)

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 4 2019
Trefwoorden Age discrimination
Auteurs Claire Huijts
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The Supreme Court found that the Court of Appeal did not properly examine whether the difference of treatment of employees based on a social plan may be justified.


Claire Huijts
Claire Huijts is an attorney-at-law at Pels Rijcken, The Hague, The Netherlands.

    Relying on the prohibition of age discrimination stemming from Directive 2000/78, the Labour Tribunal of Leuven refused to apply a Collective Labour Agreement establishing the minimum monthly salary for employees depending on their work experience even if not relevant and the Royal Decree enforcing it. The jurisdiction grounded its decision on the fact that this gave a strong advantage to older employees without objective justification.


Gautier Busschaert
Gautier Busschaert is an attorney-at-law at Van Olmen & Wynant, Brussels, Belgium.

    The author discusses the recent ECJ judgments in the cases Egenberger and IR on religious discrimination.


Andrzej Marian Świątkowski
Andrzej Marian Świątkowski, is a Jean Monet Professor of European Labour Law and Social Security, Jesuit University Ignatianum, Krakow, Poland and a member of the EELC Academic Board.
Case Reports

2019/29 Eweida versus Achbita: a storm in a teacup? (EU)

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 3 2019
Trefwoorden Religious discrimination
Auteurs Morwarid Hashemi LLM
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Most scholars have argued that the Achbita judgment is not in line with the jurisprudence of the ECtHR, in particular with the Eweida judgment, and gives less protection to the employee than granted by the ECtHR. In this article, I provide a different perspective on the relation between both judgments and nuance the criticisms that followed the Achbita judgment.


Morwarid Hashemi LLM
Morwarid Hashemi LLM is a former student of Erasmus University Rotterdam
Law Review

2019/1 EELC’s review of the year 2018

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 1 2019
Auteurs Ruben Houweling, Catherine Barnard, Filip Dorssemont e.a.
Samenvatting

    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
Landmark ruling

ECJ 17 April 2018, C-414/16 (Egenberger), Religious discrimination

Vera Egenberger – v – Evangelisches Werk für Diakonie und Entwicklung eV, German case

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 2 2018
Trefwoorden Religious discrimination
Samenvatting

    It is ultimately for the courts to verify whether religious organisations can legitimately invoke occupational requirements as a reason for unequal treatment.

Law Review

Access_open 2018/1 EELC’s review of the year 2017

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 1 2018
Auteurs Ruben Houweling, Catherine Barnard, Zef Even e.a.
Samenvatting

    This is the first time we have produced a review of employment law cases from the previous year, based on analysis by various of our academic board members. But before looking at their findings, we would first like to make some general remarks.


Ruben Houweling

Catherine Barnard

Zef Even

Amber Zwanenburg

Daiva Petrylaitė

Petr Hůrka

Jean-Philippe Lhernould

Erika Kovács

Jan-Pieter Vos

Andrej Poruban

Luca Ratti

Niklas Bruun

Francesca Maffei
ECtHR Court Watch

ECtHR 5 September 2017 (Barbulescu), Application no. 61496/08, Privacy

Barbulescu – v – Romania, Romanian case

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 4 2017
Trefwoorden Fundamental rights, Privacy
Samenvatting

    In Barbulescu, the Court examined for the first time a case concerning the monitoring of an employee’s electronic communications by a private employer. The Grand Chamber decided differently from the Chamber, when it concluded that the Romanian courts, in reviewing the decision of a private employer to dismiss an employee after having monitored his electronic communications, failed to strike a fair balance between the interests at stake: namely the employee’s right to respect for his private life and correspondence, on the one hand, and his employer’s right to take measures to ensure the smooth running of the company, on the other.

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

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 2 2017
Trefwoorden Religious discrimination
Samenvatting

    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.

Case Reports

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

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 2 2017
Trefwoorden Privacy, Unfair dismissal
Auteurs Gabriel Havrilla en Richard Sanák
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    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.

    The Supreme Court of Lithuania recently affirmed that the courts have no competence to assess the merits of an employer’s decision to restructure and make staff redundant, as the decision was at the employer’s discretion to make.


Inga Klimašauskienė
Inga Klimašauskienė is an Associate Partner at GLIMSTEDT Law Firm in Vilnius, www.glimstedt.lt.

    An employer was ordered to reinstate an employee they had wrongly dismissed. The employer reinstated him, putting him back on the payroll, but simultaneously placed him on involuntary garden leave. The employee sought and got a second court order that this was not real reinstatement. The employer was ordered to allow the employee to return to the office and perform his habitual work there on pain of a penalty of € 100 for each day of non-compliance. The employer challenged this penalty, but without success.


Inga Klimašauskiené
Inga Klimašauskiené is a Senior Associate at GLIMSTEDT in Vilnius, http://www.glimstedt.lt.
Interface Showing Amount
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment twee filters: rubriek en jaar.