Case C-438/05: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 11 December 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) — United Kingdom) International Transport Workers' Federation, Finnish Seamen's Union v Viking Line ABP, OÜ Viking Line Eesti (Maritime transport — Right of establishment — Fundamental rights — Objectives of Community social policy — Collective action taken by a trade union organisation against a private undertaking — Collective agreement liable to deter an undertaking from registering a vessel under the flag of another Member State)
Date: 2007-12-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European social policy, collective agreement, interpretation of the law, maritime transport, parent company, right of establishment, ship's flag, subsidiary, trade union rights, transport company

23.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/11

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 11 December
2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Court of
Appeal (Civil Division) — United Kingdom) International
Transport Workers' Federation, Finnish Seamen's Union v
Viking Line ABP, OÜ Viking Line Eesti

(Case C-438/05) (1)

(Maritime transport — Right of establishment — Funda-
mental rights — Objectives of Community social policy —
Collective action taken by a trade union organisation against
a private undertaking — Collective agreement liable to deter
an undertaking from registering a vessel under the flag of
another Member State)

3. Article 43 EC is to be interpreted to the effect that collective action
such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which seeks to induce
a private undertaking whose registered office is in a given Member
State to enter into a collective work agreement with a trade union
established in that State and to apply the terms set out in that
agreement to the employees of a subsidiary of that undertaking
established in another Member State,
constitutes a restriction
within the meaning of that article.

That restriction may,
in principle, be justified by an overriding
reason of public interest, such as the protection of workers, provided
that it is established that the restriction is suitable for ensuring the
attainment of the legitimate objective pursued and does not go
beyond what is necessary to achieve that objective.

(2008/C 51/17)

Language of the case: English

(1) OJ C 60, 11.3.2006.

Referring court

Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: International Transport Workers' Federation, Finnish
Seamen's Union

Defendants: Viking Line ABP, OÜ Viking Line Eesti

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Court of Appeals Civil
Division — Interpretation of Article 43 EC and of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 4055/86 of 22 December 1986 applying
the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime trans-
port between Member States and between Member States and
third countries (OJ 1986 L 378, p. 1) — Industrial action by a
trade union to compel a private undertaking to adopt a collec-
tive bargaining agreement making it pointless for that underta-
king's vessels to reflag to another Member State — Applicability
of Article 43 EC and/or Regulation No 4055/86 under Title XI
of the EC Treaty and Case C-67/96 Albany — Whether an
undertaking can rely on the provisions of Article 43 EC and/or
Regulation No 4055/86 against
another private person,
including a trade union in respect of its industrial action.

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 13 December
the European Communities v
2007 — Commission of

Italian Republic

(Case C-465/05) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Freedom
to provide services — Right of establishment — Occupation
of security guard — Private security services — Oath of alle-
giance to the Italian Republic — Authorisation from the
Prefetto — Place of business — Minimum number of
employees — Lodging of a guarantee — Administrative
control of the pricing of services provided)

(2008/C 51/18)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: E. Traversa and E. Montaguti, Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

Italian Republic (represented by:
Defendant:
Agent, and D. Del Gaizo, avvocato dello Stato)

I.M. Braguglia,

1. Article 43 EC is to be interpreted as meaning that, in principle,
collective action initiated by a trade union or a group of trade
unions against a private undertaking in order to induce that under-
taking to enter into a collective agreement, the terms of which are
liable to deter it from exercising freedom of establishment, is not
excluded from the scope of that article.

2. Article 43 EC is capable of conferring rights on a private under-
taking which may be relied on against a trade union or an associa-
tion of trade unions.

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement
of Articles 43 EC and 49 EC — Requirements for the exercise
of the occupation of private security guard — Obligation to
swear an oath of allegiance to the Italian Republic — Obligation
to obtain an authorisation from the Prefetto