Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2000:676
Date: 2000-12-07
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Sixth Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Social Policy
Concepts: Equality for men and women
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Germany

Summary of the Judgment 
1. Social policy — Men and women — Access to employment and ivorktng condi­
tions — Equal treatment — Directive 76/207 — Scope — National provisions gov­
erning the date of admission to the practical training for employment in the civil 
service — Included 
(Council Directive 76/207) 
I - 10997 
SUMMARY — CASE C-79/99 
2. Social policy — Men and women — Access to employment and working condi­
tions — Equal treatment — Priority for admission to practical training for employ­
ment in the civil service given to applicants who have completed compulsory military or 
civilian service — Women excluded de facto from benefiting from the measure — 
Objective character of the national provisions giving such priority — Indirect 
discrimination against women — None 
(Council Directive 76/207) 
1. National provisions governing the date 
of admission to the practical legal 
training which is a necessary prerequis­
ite of access to employment in the civil 
service fall within the scope of Direct­
ive 76/207 on the implementation of 
the principle of equal treatment for 
men and women as regards access to 
employment, vocational training and 
promotion, and working conditions. 
(see para. 29 and operative part 1) 
2. By giving applicants who have com­
pleted compulsory military or civilian 
service priority for admission to the 
practical training for employment in 
the civil service, national provisions 
themselves are evidence of indirect 
discrimination since, under the relevant 
national legislation, women are not 
required to do military or civilian 
service and therefore cannot benefit 
from them. However, such provisions 
which, in the case in point, take 
account of the delay experienced in 
the progress of their education by 
applicants who have been required to 
do military or civilian service, are 
objective in nature and prompted solely 
by the desire to counterbalance the 
effects of that delay. Accordingly they 
cannot be regarded as contrary to the 
principle of equal treatment for men 
and women. 
(see paras 38, 44-45) 
I - 10998