# C_2012227EN.01000701.xml

| 28.7.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 227/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.7.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 227/7

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Social No 1 de Benidorm (Spain) lodged on 26 April 2012 — Concepción Maestre García v Centros Comerciales CARREFOUR SA

(Case C-194/12)

2012/C 227/11

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Social No 1 de Benidorm

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Concepción Maestre García

Applicant:

Defendant: Centros Comerciales Carrefour SA

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Does Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time preclude an interpretation of the national legislation that does not allow interruption of a leave period, so that, at a later time, the entire period — or what remains of it — can be taken, where a temporary incapacity takes effect before the period in which leave is taken and there are reasons connected with production or organisation which preclude the leave from being taken in another later period? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time preclude an interpretation of the national legislation that does not allow interruption of a leave period, so that, at a later time, the entire period — or what remains of it — can be taken, where a temporary incapacity takes effect before the period in which leave is taken and there are reasons connected with production or organisation which preclude the leave from being taken in another later period?

1

| 2. | Does Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time preclude an interpretation of the national legislation that permits an undertaking unilaterally to schedule a leave period which coincides with a period of temporary incapacity, where the worker has not expressed in advance a preference to take another period and where there is an agreement between the representatives of the undertaking’s workers and the undertaking which so permits? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Does Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time preclude an interpretation of the national legislation that permits an undertaking unilaterally to schedule a leave period which coincides with a period of temporary incapacity, where the worker has not expressed in advance a preference to take another period and where there is an agreement between the representatives of the undertaking’s workers and the undertaking which so permits?

| 3. | Does Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time preclude an interpretation of the national legislation that permits payment in lieu of leave not taken as a result of temporary incapacity if there are reasons connected with production or organisation which preclude the leave from actually being taken, even though the employment contract has not been terminated? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Does Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time preclude an interpretation of the national legislation that permits payment in lieu of leave not taken as a result of temporary incapacity if there are reasons connected with production or organisation which preclude the leave from actually being taken, even though the employment contract has not been terminated?

---

(1)  OJ 2003 L 299, p. 9

1

---