Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2009:466
Date: 2009-07-16
Language of the case: French
Court formation: Fourth Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Approximation of laws;Social Policy
Concepts: Employment protection and protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer;Right to a judicial remedy
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Belgium

Summary of the Judgment 1. Social policy – Approximation of laws – Collective redundancies – Directive 98/59 – Procedure for informing and consulting employees (Council Directive 98/59, Arts 2 and 6) 2. Community law – Principles – Right to effective judicial protection – National rules for informing and consulting employees in the case of collective redundancy (Council Directive 98/59, Arts 2 and 6) 3. Social policy – Approximation of laws – Collective redundancies – Directive 98/59 – Procedure for informing and consulting employees (Council Directive 98/59, Art. 2) 1. Article 6 of Council Directive 98/59 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies, read in conjunction with Article 2 thereof, is to be interpreted as not precluding national rules which introduce procedures intended to permit both workers’ representatives and the workers themselves as individuals to ensure compliance with the obligations laid down in that directive, but which limit the individual right of action of workers in regard to the complaints which may be raised and makes that right subject to the requirement that workers’ representatives should first have raised objections with the employer and that the worker concerned has informed the employer in advance of his intention to query whether the information and consultation procedure has been complied with. The right to information and consultation provided for in Directive 98/59, in particular by Article 2 thereof, is intended to benefit workers as a collective group and is therefore collective in nature. The level of protection of that collective right required by Article 6 of the directive is reached when the applicable national rules give workers’ representatives a right to act which is not limited by specific conditions. (see paras 42-43, 45, operative part 1) 2. The fact that national rules, establishing procedures which permit workers’ representatives to ensure that the employer has complied with all the information and consultation obligations set out in Directive 98/59 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies, impose limits and conditions on the individual right of action which it also grants to every worker affected by collective redundancy is not of such a nature as to infringe the principle of effective judicial protection. (see para. 52, operative part 2) 3. Article 2 of Directive 98/59 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies must be interpreted as precluding national rules which reduce the obligations of an employer who intends to proceed with collective redundancies below those laid down in Article 2 of that directive. In applying domestic law, the national court is required, applying the principle of interpreting national law in conformity with Community law, to consider all the rules of national law and to interpret them, so far as possible, in the light of the wording and purpose of Directive 98/59 in order to achieve an outcome consistent with the objective pursued by the directive. Consequently, it must ensure, within the limits of its jurisdiction, that the obligations binding such an employer are not reduced below those laid down in Article 2 of that directive. (see para. 65, operative part 3)