Judgment of the Court 4 June 2002 in Case C-164/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice (England & Wales), Queen's Bench Division): Katia Beckmann v Dynamco Whicheloe Macfarlane Ltd (Directive 77/187/EEC — Safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of businesses — Conditions for appplying exceptions to maintenance of rights — Benefits provided for in the event of dismissal)
Date: 2002-07-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: United Kingdom, dismissal, interpretation of the law, labour law, pension scheme, transfer of businesses

C 169/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

13.7.2002

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

4 June 2002

in Case C-164/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the High Court of Justice (England & Wales), Queen’s
Bench Division): Katia Beckmann v Dynamco Whicheloe
Macfarlane Ltd (1)

(Directive 77/187/EEC — Safeguarding of employees’ rights
in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts
of businesses — Conditions for appplying exceptions to
maintenance of rights — Benefits provided for in the event
of dismissal)

(2002/C 169/12)

(Language of the case: English)

In Case C-164/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, Queen’s
Bench Division, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings
pending before that court between Katia Beckmann and
Dynamco Whicheloe Macfarlane Ltd, on the interpretation of
Article 3 of Council Directive 77/187/EEC of 14 February
1977 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States
relating to the safeguarding of employees’ rights in the event
of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of businesses
(OJ 1977 L 61, p. 26), the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed
of: G.C. Rodrı´guez Iglesias, President, N. Colneric, and S. von
Bahr (Presidents of Chambers), C. Gulmann, D.A.O. Edward,
A. La Pergola,
J.-P. Puissochet (Rapporteur), M. Wathelet,
R. Schintgen, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues and C.W.A. Timmermans,
Judges; S. Alber, Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Administrator,
for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 4 June 2002, in
which it has ruled:

1.

Early retirement benefits and benefits intended to enhance the
conditions of such retirement, paid in the event of dismissal to
employees who have reached a certain age, such as the benefits
at issue in the main proceedings, are not old-age, invalidity or
survivors’ benefits under supplementary company or inter-
company pension schemes within the meaning of Article 3(3)
of Council Directive 77/187/EEC of 14 February 1977 on the
approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the
safeguarding of employees’ rights in the event of transfers of
undertakings, businesses or parts of businesses.

2. On a proper construction of Article 3 of Directive 77/187, the
obligations applicable in the event of the dismissal of an
employee, arising from a contract of employment, an employ-

ment relationship or a collective agreement binding the trans-
feror as regards that employee, are transferred to the transferee
subject to the conditions and limitations laid down by that
article, regardless of the fact that those obligations derive from
statutory instruments or are implemented by such instruments
and regardless of the practical arrangements adopted for such
implementation.

(1) OJ C 192 of 8.7.2000.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

30 May 2002

in Joined Cases C-284/00 and C-288/00 (Reference for a
preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht):
Stratmann GmbH und Co. KG v Landrätin des Kreises
Wesel (C-284/00) and Fleischversorgung Neuss GmbH
und Co. v Landrat des Kreises Neuss (C-288/00) (1)

(Common agricultural policy — Fees for health inspections
and controls in respect of fresh meat)

(2002/C 169/13)

(Language of the case: German)

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
in the European Court Reports)

In Joined Cases C-284/00 and C-288/00: Reference to the
Court under Article 234 EC by the Bundesverwaltungsgericht
(Germany) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending
before that court between Stratmann GmbH und Co. KG
and Landrätin des Kreises Wesel (C-284/00), and between
Fleischversorgung Neuss GmbH und Co. KG and Landrat des
Kreises Neuss (C-288/00), on the interpretation of,
first,
Council Directive 85/73/EEC of 29 January 1985 on the
financing of health inspections and controls of fresh meat and
poultrymeat (OJ 1985 L 32, p. 14) and Council Decision 88/
408/EEC of 15 June 1988 on the levels of the fees to be
charged for health inspections and controls of fresh meat
pursuant to Directive 85/73 (OJ 1988 L 194, p. 24) and,
secondly, Directive 85/73 as amended by Council Directive
93/118/EC of 22 December 1993 (OJ 1993 L 340, p. 15), in
conjunction with Council Directive 64/433/EEC of 26 June
1964 on health problems affecting intra-Community trade in
fresh meat (OJ, English Special Edition 1963-64, p. 185) both
in the version resulting from Council Directive 89/662/EEC of
11 December 1989 concerning veterinary checks in intra-
Community trade with a view to the completion of the internal