# C_2012174EN.01000402.xml

| 16.6.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 174/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.6.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 174/4

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 3 May 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Frankfurt am Main (Germany) — Georg Neidel v Stadt Frankfurt am Main

(Case C-337/10) (1)

1

(Social policy - Directive 2003/88/EC - Working conditions - Organisation of working time - Right to paid annual leave - Allowance in lieu in the event of sickness - Public servants (firemen))

2012/C 174/04

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Frankfurt am Main

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Georg Neidel

Applicant:

Defendant: Stadt Frankfurt am Main

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Verwaltungsgericht Frankfurt am Main — Interpretation of Article 7 of 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 2003 L 299, p. 9) — Entitlement to an allowance in lieu of paid annual leave not taken in full because of unfitness for service lasting for several years before retirement — Scope ratione personae of Directive 2003/88/EC — Public servants (firemen)

ratione personae

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | Article 7 of 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 must be interpreted as applying to a public servant carrying out the activities of a fireman in normal circumstances. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Article 7 of 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 must be interpreted as applying to a public servant carrying out the activities of a fireman in normal circumstances.

| 2. | Article 7(2) of Directive 2003/88 must be interpreted as meaning that a public servant is entitled, on retirement, to an allowance in lieu of paid annual leave not taken because he was prevented from working by sickness. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Article 7(2) of Directive 2003/88 must be interpreted as meaning that a public servant is entitled, on retirement, to an allowance in lieu of paid annual leave not taken because he was prevented from working by sickness.

| 3. | Article 7 of Directive 2003/88 must be interpreted as not precluding provisions of national law conferring on a public servant an entitlement to further paid leave in addition to the entitlement to a minimum paid annual leave of four weeks, which do not provide for the payment of an allowance in lieu if a public servant who is retiring has been unable to use that additional entitlement because he was prevented from working by sickness. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Article 7 of Directive 2003/88 must be interpreted as not precluding provisions of national law conferring on a public servant an entitlement to further paid leave in addition to the entitlement to a minimum paid annual leave of four weeks, which do not provide for the payment of an allowance in lieu if a public servant who is retiring has been unable to use that additional entitlement because he was prevented from working by sickness.

| 4. | Article 7(2) of Directive 2003/88 must be interpreted as precluding a provision of national law which restricts, by a carry-over period of nine months on expiry of which the entitlement to paid annual leave lapses, the right of a public servant who is retiring to cumulate the allowances in lieu of paid annual leave not taken because he was unfit for service. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Article 7(2) of Directive 2003/88 must be interpreted as precluding a provision of national law which restricts, by a carry-over period of nine months on expiry of which the entitlement to paid annual leave lapses, the right of a public servant who is retiring to cumulate the allowances in lieu of paid annual leave not taken because he was unfit for service.

---

(1)  OJ C 301, 6.11.2010.

1

---