# C_2011204EN.01001301.xml

| 9.7.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 204/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.7.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 204/13

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeitsgericht Munich (Germany) lodged on 28 March 2011 — Johann Odar v Baxter Deutschland GmbH

(Case C-152/11)

2011/C 204/24

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Arbeitsgericht Munich

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Johann Odar

Applicant:

Defendant: Baxter Deutschland GmbH

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Is a national rule which provides that different treatment on the ground of age may be lawful if, in the framework of an occupational social security scheme, the management and the works council have excluded from social plan benefits employees who are financially secure because they are entitled to a pension after, as the case may be, drawing unemployment benefit, contrary to the prohibition of discrimination on the ground of age, laid down by Articles 1 and 16 of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, (1) or is that unequal treatment justified under Article 6(1), second sentence, point (a), of Directive 2000/78/EC? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is a national rule which provides that different treatment on the ground of age may be lawful if, in the framework of an occupational social security scheme, the management and the works council have excluded from social plan benefits employees who are financially secure because they are entitled to a pension after, as the case may be, drawing unemployment benefit, contrary to the prohibition of discrimination on the ground of age, laid down by Articles 1 and 16 of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, (1) or is that unequal treatment justified under Article 6(1), second sentence, point (a), of Directive 2000/78/EC?

1

| 2. | Is a national rule which provides that different treatment on the ground of age may be lawful if, in the framework of an occupational social security scheme, the management and the works council have excluded from social plan benefits employees who are financially secure because they are entitled to a pension after, as the case may be, drawing unemployment benefit, contrary to the prohibition of discrimination on the ground of disability laid down by Articles 1 and 16 of Directive 2000/78/EC? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is a national rule which provides that different treatment on the ground of age may be lawful if, in the framework of an occupational social security scheme, the management and the works council have excluded from social plan benefits employees who are financially secure because they are entitled to a pension after, as the case may be, drawing unemployment benefit, contrary to the prohibition of discrimination on the ground of disability laid down by Articles 1 and 16 of Directive 2000/78/EC?

| 3. | Is a rule of an occupational social security scheme which provides that, in the case of employees older than 54 years of age who are made redundant on operational grounds, an alternative calculation will be made of the compensation on the basis of the earliest possible date on which their pension will begin and, by comparison with the more normal method of calculation, will in particular take account of the length of service, whereby the smaller amount of compensation, of at least one half of the normal sum in compensation, will be paid, contrary to the prohibition of discrimination on the ground of age laid down by Articles 1 and 16 of Directive 2000/78/EC, or is that unequal treatment justified under Article 6(1), second sentence, point (a), of Directive 2000/78/EC? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Is a rule of an occupational social security scheme which provides that, in the case of employees older than 54 years of age who are made redundant on operational grounds, an alternative calculation will be made of the compensation on the basis of the earliest possible date on which their pension will begin and, by comparison with the more normal method of calculation, will in particular take account of the length of service, whereby the smaller amount of compensation, of at least one half of the normal sum in compensation, will be paid, contrary to the prohibition of discrimination on the ground of age laid down by Articles 1 and 16 of Directive 2000/78/EC, or is that unequal treatment justified under Article 6(1), second sentence, point (a), of Directive 2000/78/EC?

| 4. | Is a rule of an occupational social security scheme which provides that, in the case of employees older than 54 years of age who are made redundant on operational grounds, an alternative calculation will be made of the compensation on the basis of the earliest possible date on which their pension will begin and, by comparison with the more normal method of calculation, will in particular take account of the length of service, whereby the smaller amount of compensation, of at least one half of the normal sum in compensation, will be paid, the alternative method of calculation taking into account a retirement pension on the ground of disability, contrary to the prohibition of discrimination on the ground of disability laid down by Articles 1 and 16 of Directive 2000/78/EC? |
| --- | --- |

4.

Is a rule of an occupational social security scheme which provides that, in the case of employees older than 54 years of age who are made redundant on operational grounds, an alternative calculation will be made of the compensation on the basis of the earliest possible date on which their pension will begin and, by comparison with the more normal method of calculation, will in particular take account of the length of service, whereby the smaller amount of compensation, of at least one half of the normal sum in compensation, will be paid, the alternative method of calculation taking into account a retirement pension on the ground of disability, contrary to the prohibition of discrimination on the ground of disability laid down by Articles 1 and 16 of Directive 2000/78/EC?

---

(1)  OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16.

1

---