Case C-396/07: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 27 November 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus — Finland) — Mirja Juuri v Fazer Amica Oy (Social policy — Directive 2001/23/EC — Safeguarding of employees' rights — Transfer of undertakings — Article 4(2) — Substantial change in working conditions involved by a transfer — Collective agreement — Termination of the contract of employment by the employee — Termination for which the employer is regarded as responsible — Consequences — Financial compensation for which the employer is liable)
Date: 2008-11-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: dismissal, indemnification, interpretation of the law, labour law, transfer of businesses, work contract, working conditions

24.1.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 19/7

Re:

Parties to the main proceedings

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht Hamburg —
Interpretation of
the second paragraph of Article 13 of
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995
laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds
on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of distur-
bance on the market for cereals (OJ 1995 L 147, p. 7) —
Simplified procedure: obligation to produce transport docu-
ments

Operative part of the judgment

for

Article 13 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June
1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on
cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the
market
cereals, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC)
No 1259/97 of 1 July 1997, must be interpreted as meaning that
the fact that the operator provides proof that a quantity of at least
1 500 tonnes of cereal product has left the customs territory of the
European Community on board a vessel suitable for sea transport does
not release him from the obligation laid down in Article 16(3) of
Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/1999 of 15 April 1999
laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of
export refunds on agricultural products to produce a copy or a photo-
copy of the transport documents.

(1) OJ C 269, 10.11.2007.

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 27 November
2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein
oikeus — Finland) — Mirja Juuri v Fazer Amica Oy

(Case C-396/07) (1)

(Social policy — Directive 2001/23/EC — Safeguarding of
employees' rights — Transfer of undertakings — Article 4(2)
— Substantial change in working conditions involved by a
transfer — Collective agreement — Termination of
the
contract of employment by the employee — Termination for
which the employer is regarded as responsible — Conse-
quences — Financial compensation for which the employer is
liable)

(2009/C 19/11)

Language of the case: Finnish

Referring court

Korkein oikeus

Applicant: Mirja Juuri

Defendant: Fazer Amica Oy

Re:

Preliminary ruling — Korkein oikeus — Interpretation of
Article 4(2) of Council Directive 2001/23/EC of 12 March
2001 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 undertakings or
businesses (OJ 2001 L 82, p. 16) — Responsibility of
the
employer
terminated his
to an employee who has himself
contract of employment after his working conditions have
become substantially worse following the transfer of an under-
taking which has resulted in a different collective agreement
becoming applicable

Operative part of the judgment

Article 4(2) of Council Directive 2001/23/EC of 12 March 2001 on
the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the
safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertak-
ings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses must be inter-
preted as meaning that, in cases where the termination of a contract of
employment or an employment relationship is brought about because
the conditions for the applicability of that provision have been met,
independently of any failure on the part of the transferee employer to
fulfil its obligations under that directive, the Member States are not
required to guarantee the employee a right to financial compensation,
for which the transferee employer is liable, in accordance with the same
conditions as the right upon which an employee can rely where the
contract of employment or the employment relationship is unlawfully
terminated by his employer. However, the national court is required, in
a case within its jurisdiction, to ensure that, at the very least, the trans-
feree employer in such a case bears the consequences that the applicable
national law attaches to termination by an employer of the contract of
employment or the employment relationship, such as the payment of
the salary and other benefits relating, under that law, to the notice
period with which an employer must comply.

It is for the referring court to assess the situation at issue in the case
before it in the light of the interpretation of Article 3(3) of Directive
2001/23 as meaning that the continued observance of the terms and
conditions agreed in a collective agreement which expires on the date of
the transfer of the undertaking is not guaranteed after that date.

(1) OJ C 269, 10.11.2007.