# C_2013252EN.01002203.xml

| 31.8.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.8.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/22

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Retten i Kolding (Denmark) lodged on 27 June 2013 — FOA, acting on behalf of Karsten Kaltoft v Billund Kommune

(Case C-354/13)

2013/C 252/37

Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Referring court

Retten i Kolding

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: FOA, acting on behalf of Karsten Kaltoft

Applicant:

Defendant: Billund Kommune

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Is it contrary to EU law as expressed, for example, in Article 6 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, generally or particularly for a public-sector employer to discriminate on grounds of obesity in the labour market? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is it contrary to EU law as expressed, for example, in Article 6 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, generally or particularly for a public-sector employer to discriminate on grounds of obesity in the labour market?

| 2. | If there is an EU prohibition on discrimination on grounds of obesity, is it directly applicable as between a Danish citizen and his employer, a public authority? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If there is an EU prohibition on discrimination on grounds of obesity, is it directly applicable as between a Danish citizen and his employer, a public authority?

| 3. | Should the Court find that there is a prohibition under EU law on discrimination on grounds of obesity in the labour market generally or in particular for public-sector employers, is the assessment as to whether action has been taken contrary to a potential prohibition on discrimination on grounds of obesity in that case to be conducted with a shared burden of proof, with the result that the actual implementation of the prohibition in cases where proof of such discrimination has been made out requires that the burden of proof be placed on the respondent/defendant employer (see recital 18 in the preamble to Council Directive 97/80/EC of 15 December 1997 on the burden of proof in cases of discrimination based on sex (1))? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Should the Court find that there is a prohibition under EU law on discrimination on grounds of obesity in the labour market generally or in particular for public-sector employers, is the assessment as to whether action has been taken contrary to a potential prohibition on discrimination on grounds of obesity in that case to be conducted with a shared burden of proof, with the result that the actual implementation of the prohibition in cases where proof of such discrimination has been made out requires that the burden of proof be placed on the respondent/defendant employer (see recital 18 in the preamble to Council Directive 97/80/EC of 15 December 1997 on the burden of proof in cases of discrimination based on sex (1))?

1

| 4. | Can obesity be deemed to be to be a handicap covered by the protection provided for in Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (2) and, if so, which criteria will be decisive for the assessment as to whether a person’s obesity means specifically that that person is protected by the prohibition on discrimination on grounds of handicap as laid down in that directive? |
| --- | --- |

4.

Can obesity be deemed to be to be a handicap covered by the protection provided for in Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (2) and, if so, which criteria will be decisive for the assessment as to whether a person’s obesity means specifically that that person is protected by the prohibition on discrimination on grounds of handicap as laid down in that directive?

2

---

(1)  OJ 1998 L 14, p. 6.

1

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

2

---