# C_2016222EN.01000602.xml

| 20.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 222/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/6

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division) (United Kingdom) made on 18 April 2016 — C. King v The Sash Window Workshop Ltd, Richard Dollar

(Case C-214/16)

(2016/C 222/08)

Language of the case: English

Referring court

Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: C. King

Defendants: The Sash Window Workshop Ltd, Richard Dollar

Questions referred

| (1) | If there is a dispute between a worker and employer as to whether the worker is entitled to annual leave with pay pursuant to article 7 of Directive 2003/88 (1), is it compatible with EU law, and in particular the principle of effective remedy, if the worker has to take leave first before being able to establish whether he is entitled to be paid? |
| --- | --- |

(1)

If there is a dispute between a worker and employer as to whether the worker is entitled to annual leave with pay pursuant to article 7 of Directive 2003/88 (1), is it compatible with EU law, and in particular the principle of effective remedy, if the worker has to take leave first before being able to establish whether he is entitled to be paid?

| (2) | If the worker does not take all or some of the annual leave to which he is entitled in the leave year when any right should be exercised, in circumstances where he would have done so but for the fact that the employer refuses to pay him for any period of leave he takes, can the worker claim that he is prevented from exercising his right to paid leave such that the right carries over until he has the opportunity to exercise it? |
| --- | --- |

(2)

If the worker does not take all or some of the annual leave to which he is entitled in the leave year when any right should be exercised, in circumstances where he would have done so but for the fact that the employer refuses to pay him for any period of leave he takes, can the worker claim that he is prevented from exercising his right to paid leave such that the right carries over until he has the opportunity to exercise it?

| (3) | If the right carries over, does it do so indefinitely or is there a limited period for exercising the carried-over right by analogy with the limitations imposed where the worker is unable to exercise the right to leave in the relevant leave year because of sickness? |
| --- | --- |

(3)

If the right carries over, does it do so indefinitely or is there a limited period for exercising the carried-over right by analogy with the limitations imposed where the worker is unable to exercise the right to leave in the relevant leave year because of sickness?

| (4) | If there is no statutory or contractual provision specifying a carry-over period, is the court obliged to impose a limit to the carry-over period in order to ensure that the application of the Regulations does not distort the purpose behind article 7? |
| --- | --- |

(4)

If there is no statutory or contractual provision specifying a carry-over period, is the court obliged to impose a limit to the carry-over period in order to ensure that the application of the Regulations does not distort the purpose behind article 7?

| (5) | If so, is a period of 18 months following the end of the holiday year in which the leave accrued compatible with the article 7 right? |
| --- | --- |

(5)

If so, is a period of 18 months following the end of the holiday year in which the leave accrued compatible with the article 7 right?

---

(1)  Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time. OJ L 299, p. 9

---