# C_2016211EN.01001201.xml

| 13.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 211/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 211/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 19 April 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Højesteret — Denmark) — Dansk Industri (DI), acting on behalf of Ajos A/S v Estate of Karsten Eigil Rasmussen

(Case C-441/14) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Directive 2000/78/EC - Principle prohibiting discrimination on grounds of age - National legislation incompatible with the directive - Possibility for a private person to bring proceedings to establish the liability of the State for breach of EU law - Dispute between private persons - Balancing of various rights and principles - Principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations - Role of the national court))

(2016/C 211/13)

Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Højesteret

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Dansk Industri (DI), acting on behalf of Ajos A/S

Defendant: Estate of Karsten Eigil Rasmussen

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | The general principle prohibiting discrimination on grounds of age, as given concrete expression by Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, must be interpreted as precluding, including in disputes between private persons, national legislation, such as that at issue in the proceedings before the referring court, which deprives an employee of entitlement to a severance allowance where the employee is entitled to claim an old-age pension from the employer under a pension scheme which the employee joined before reaching the age of 50, regardless of whether the employee chooses to remain on the employment market or take his retirement. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The general principle prohibiting discrimination on grounds of age, as given concrete expression by Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, must be interpreted as precluding, including in disputes between private persons, national legislation, such as that at issue in the proceedings before the referring court, which deprives an employee of entitlement to a severance allowance where the employee is entitled to claim an old-age pension from the employer under a pension scheme which the employee joined before reaching the age of 50, regardless of whether the employee chooses to remain on the employment market or take his retirement.

| 2. | EU law is to be interpreted as meaning that a national court adjudicating in a dispute between private persons falling within the scope of Directive 2000/78 is required, when applying provisions of national law, to interpret those provisions in such a way that they may be applied in a manner that is consistent with the directive or, if such an interpretation is not possible, to disapply, where necessary, any provision of national law that is contrary to the general principle prohibiting discrimination on grounds of age. Neither the principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations nor the fact that it is possible for the private person who considers that he has been wronged by the application of a provision of national law that is at odds with EU law to bring proceedings to establish the liability of the Member State concerned for breach of EU law can alter that obligation. |
| --- | --- |

2.

EU law is to be interpreted as meaning that a national court adjudicating in a dispute between private persons falling within the scope of Directive 2000/78 is required, when applying provisions of national law, to interpret those provisions in such a way that they may be applied in a manner that is consistent with the directive or, if such an interpretation is not possible, to disapply, where necessary, any provision of national law that is contrary to the general principle prohibiting discrimination on grounds of age. Neither the principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations nor the fact that it is possible for the private person who considers that he has been wronged by the application of a provision of national law that is at odds with EU law to bring proceedings to establish the liability of the Member State concerned for breach of EU law can alter that obligation.

---

(1)  OJ C 421, 24.11.2014.

---