Joined Cases C-350/06 and C-520/06: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 20 January 2009 (references for a preliminary ruling from the Landesarbeitsgericht Düsseldorf (Germany) and House of Lords (United Kingdom)) — Gerhard Schultz-Hoff v Deutsche Rentenversicherung Bund (Working conditions — Organisation of working time — Directive 2003/88/EC — Right to paid annual leave — Sick leave — Annual leave coinciding with sick leave — Compensation for paid annual leave not taken before the end of the contract because of sickness)
Date: 2009-01-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: illness, indemnification, interpretation of the law, labour law, paid leave

21.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 69/3

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 29 January
2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio
di Stato — Italy) — Consiglio Nazionale degli Ingegneri v
Ministero della Giustizia, Marco Cavallera

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 20 January
2009 (references
for a preliminary ruling from the
Landesarbeitsgericht Düsseldorf (Germany) and House of
(United Kingdom)) — Gerhard Schultz-Hoff v
Lords

(Case C-311/06) (1)

(Recognition of diplomas — Directive 89/48/EEC — Homolo-
gation of an educational qualification — Engineer)

(2009/C 69/03)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Consiglio Nazionale degli Ingegneri

Deutsche Rentenversicherung Bund

(Joined Cases C-350/06 and C-520/06) (1)

(Working conditions — Organisation of working time —
Directive 2003/88/EC — Right to paid annual leave — Sick
leave — Annual leave coinciding with sick leave — Compen-
sation for paid annual leave not taken before the end of the
contract because of sickness)

(2009/C 69/04)

Language of the case: German and English

Referring courts

Landesarbeitsgericht Düsseldorf, House of Lords

Defendants: Ministero della Giustizia, Marco Cavallera

Parties to the main proceedings

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Consiglio di Stato — Inter-
pretation of Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988
on a general system for the recognition of higher-education
diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and
training of at least three years' duration (OJ 1989 L 19, p. 16)
— Whether applicable in the case of an Italian national who is
registered in the Spanish professional register following recogni-
tion of equivalence of his engineering degree but who has never
pursued that profession in Spain and who applies, on the basis
the Spanish qualification authorising him to pursue that
of
profession, to be entered in the professional register in Italy

Operative part of the judgment

The provisions of Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December
1988 on a general system for the recognition of higher-education
diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training
of at least three years' duration cannot be relied on, for the purpose of
gaining access to a regulated profession in a host Member State, by the
holder of a certificate issued by an authority of another Member State
which does not attest any education or training covered by the educa-
tion system of that Member State and is not based on either an exami-
nation taken or professional experience acquired in that Member State.

(1) OJ C 249, 14.10.2006.

Applicants: Gerhard Schultz-Hoff
Others (C-520/06)

(C-350/06), Stringer

and

Defendants: Deutsche Rentenversicherung Bund (C-350/06), Her
Majesty's Revenue and Customs (C-520/06)

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Landesarbeitsgericht
Düsseldorf, House of Lords — Interpretation of Article 7(1) and
(2) of Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of
the organisation of working time (OJ L 299, p. 9) — Right to
paid annual
leave subject to the following conditions: actual
presence in the workplace, maintenance of the capacity to work
during the leave, and exercise not capable of extension beyond a
deadline in the following year — Right of a worker on indefinite
sick leave to take annual leave during that sick leave — Right of
a worker who has been dismissed while on long-term sick leave
to receive compensation for the annual leave not taken during
the leave year

Operative part of the judgment

1. Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament
and of
the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain
aspects of the organisation of working time must be interpreted as
not precluding national legislation or practices according to which a
worker on sick leave is not entitled to take paid annual leave during
that sick leave.

C 69/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

21.3.2009

2. Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88 must be

interpreted as
precluding national legislation or practices which provide that the
right to paid annual leave is extinguished at the end of the leave
year and/or of a carry-over period laid down by national law even
where the worker has been on sick leave for the whole or part of
the leave year and where his incapacity to work has persisted until
the end of his employment relationship, which was the reason why
he could not exercise his right to paid annual leave.

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Heemskerk BV, Firma Schaap

Defendant: Productschap Vee en Vlees

3. Article 7(2) of Directive 2003/88 must be

interpreted as
precluding national legislation or practices which provide that, on
termination of the employment relationship, no allowance in lieu of
paid annual leave not taken is to be paid to a worker who has
been on sick leave for the whole or part of the leave year and/or of
a carry-over period, which was the reason why he could not exercise
his right to paid annual leave. For the calculation of the allowance
in lieu, the worker's normal remuneration, which is that which
must be maintained during the rest period corresponding to the
paid annual leave, is also decisive.

(1) OJ C 281, 18.11.2006.
OJ C 56, 10.3.2007.

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 25 November
2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the College
van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven (Netherlands)) —
Heemskerk BV, Firma Schaap v Productschap Vee en Vlees

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — College van Beroep voor
het bedrijfsleven — Interpretation of Article 2(2) of Commis-
sion Regulation No 615/98 of 18 March 1998 laying down
the export refund
specific detailed rules of application for
arrangements as regards the welfare of
live bovine animals
during transport (OJ 1998 L 82, p. 19), of Article 33(9) of
Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the
common organization of the market in beef and veal (OJ 1999
L 160, p. 21), of Council Directive 91/628/EEC of 19 November
1991 on the protection of animals during transport and
amending Directives 90/425/EEC and 91/496/EEC (OJ 1991
L 340, p. 17) and of Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/1999
of 15 April 1999 laying down common detailed rules for the
the system of export refunds on agricultural
application of
products (OJ 1999 L 102, p. 11) — Power of an administrative
authority of a Member State to find, contrary to the declaration
of the official veterinarian, that the means of transport is not in
accordance with Community provisions — Assessment based
on criteria of the Member State concerned or of the Member
State in which the vessel transporting the animals is registered
— Powers of the courts of the Member States.

(Case C-455/06) (1)

Operative part of the judgment

(Regulations (EC) Nos 615/98, 1254/1999 and 800/1999 —
Directive 91/628/EEC — Export refunds — Protection of
bovine animals during transport — Power of an administra-
tive authority of a Member State to find, contrary to the
declaration of the official veterinarian, that the means of
transport of the animals does not comply with Community
legislation — Jurisdiction of national courts of Member States
— Examination of their own motion of pleas in law derived
from Community law — National rule prohibiting reformatio
in pejus)

(2009/C 69/05)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven

1. Commission Regulation (EC) No 615/98 of 18 March 1998
laying down specific detailed rules of application for the export
refund arrangements as regards the welfare of live bovine animals
during transport, and, in particular, Articles 1 and 5(3) and (7)
thereof, must be interpreted as meaning that a national authority
with competence for export refunds is empowered to decide that a
transport of animals was not carried out in accordance with the
provisions of Council Directive 91/628/EEC of 19 November
1991 on the protection of animals during transport and amending
Directives 90/425/EEC and 91/496/EEC, as amended by Council
Directive 95/29/EC of 29 June 1995,
under
Article 2(3) of that regulation, the official veterinarian had certified
that that transport complied with the provisions of that directive. In
order to reach that conclusion, that authority must rely on objective
elements relating to the welfare of the animals such as to call into
question the documents presented by the exporter, it being for the
latter to show,
in that case, that the elements relied on by the
competent authority for its finding of non-compliance with Direc-
tive 91/628, as amended by Directive 95/29, are irrelevant.

although,

the vessel, the competent authority of

2. Where a vessel has been authorised for the transport of animals in
respect of a certain surface area by the Member State of registration
the Member State of
of
export must
for assessing
take that authorisation as a basis
whether Community legislation on the welfare of animals during
transport has been complied with.