Case C-415/10

Galina Meister

v

Speech Design Carrier Systems GmbH

(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesarbeitsgericht)

‛Directives 2000/43/EC, 2000/78/EC and 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment in employment and occupation — Worker showing that he meets the requirements listed in a job advertisement — Right of that worker to have access to information indicating whether the employer has recruited another applicant’

Summary of the Judgment

Social policy — Male and female workers — Access to employment and working conditions — Equal treatment — Burden of proof in cases of discrimination

(European Parliament and Council Directive 2006/54, Art. 19(1); Council Directives 2000/43, Art. 8(1), and 2000/78, Art. 10(1))

Article 8(1) of Directive 2000/43 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin, Article 10(1) of Directive 2000/78 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation and Article 19(1) of Directive 2006/54 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation must be interpreted as not entitling a worker, who claims plausibly that he meets the requirements listed in a job advertisement and whose application was rejected, to have access to information indicating whether the employer engaged another applicant at the end of the recruitment process.

Nevertheless, it is not inconceivable that a defendant’s refusal to grant any access to information may be one of the factors to take into account in the context of establishing facts from which it may be presumed that there has been direct or indirect discrimination. It is for the referring court to determine whether that is the case in the main proceedings, taking into account all the circumstances of the case before it.

(see paras 46-47, operative part)

Case C-415/10

Galina Meister

v

Speech Design Carrier Systems GmbH

(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesarbeitsgericht)

‛Directives 2000/43/EC, 2000/78/EC and 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment in employment and occupation — Worker showing that he meets the requirements listed in a job advertisement — Right of that worker to have access to information indicating whether the employer has recruited another applicant’

Summary of the Judgment

Social policy — Male and female workers — Access to employment and working conditions — Equal treatment — Burden of proof in cases of discrimination

(European Parliament and Council Directive 2006/54, Art. 19(1); Council Directives 2000/43, Art. 8(1), and 2000/78, Art. 10(1))

Article 8(1) of Directive 2000/43 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin, Article 10(1) of Directive 2000/78 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation and Article 19(1) of Directive 2006/54 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation must be interpreted as not entitling a worker, who claims plausibly that he meets the requirements listed in a job advertisement and whose application was rejected, to have access to information indicating whether the employer engaged another applicant at the end of the recruitment process.

Nevertheless, it is not inconceivable that a defendant’s refusal to grant any access to information may be one of the factors to take into account in the context of establishing facts from which it may be presumed that there has been direct or indirect discrimination. It is for the referring court to determine whether that is the case in the main proceedings, taking into account all the circumstances of the case before it.

(see paras 46-47, operative part)