Case C-579/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeits- und Sozialgericht Wien (Austria) lodged on 3 October 2017 — BUAK Bauarbeiter-Urlaubs- u. Abfertigungskasse v Gradbeništvo Korana d.o.o.
Date: 2017-10-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Austria, building industry, employer, expatriate worker, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, labour law, paid leave, public administration, severance pay, workplace








C_2017424EN.01002302.xml










11.12.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 424/23





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeits- und Sozialgericht Wien (Austria) lodged on 3 October 2017 — BUAK Bauarbeiter-Urlaubs- u. Abfertigungskasse v Gradbeništvo Korana d.o.o.
(Case C-579/17)
(2017/C 424/34)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Arbeits- und Sozialgericht Wien

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: BUAK Bauarbeiter-Urlaubs- u. Abfertigungskasse

Defendant: Gradbeništvo Korana d.o.o.

Question referred

Is Article 1 of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (1) to be interpreted as meaning that proceedings involving the assertion of claims by the Bauarbeiter-Urlaubs- und Abfertigungskasse (Construction Workers’ Leave and Severance Pay Fund, Austria) (‘BUAK’) for wage supplements against employers as a result of the posting to Austria of workers without a habitual place of work in Austria for the purposes of performing work or in connection with the hiring-out of workers, or against employers established outside Austria as a result of the employment of workers with a habitual place of work in Austria, constitute ‘civil and commercial matters’ to which the aforementioned regulation applies, even where such claims by BUAK for wage supplements concern employment relationships governed by private law and serve to cover workers’ claims to annual leave and payment in respect of annual leave (‘annual leave pay’), governed by private law and arising from employment relationships with employers, but nevertheless






—


both the amount of the workers’ claims against BUAK for annual leave pay and that of BUAK’s claims against employers for wage supplements are determined not by contract or collective bargaining agreement but, instead, by decree of a Federal Minister,










—


the wage supplements owed by employers to BUAK serve to cover not only the expenses for the payment in respect of annual leave payable to workers but also BUAK’s expenses for administrative costs and










—


in connection with the pursuit and enforcement of its claims for such wage supplements, BUAK has more extensive powers by law than a private person, in that






—


employers are required to submit reports to BUAK on specific occasions as well as at monthly intervals, using communication channels set up by BUAK, to take part in and allow BUAK’s inspection measures, grant BUAK access to wage and business records and other documents, and provide information to BUAK, failing which a fine may be imposed, and










—


in the event that an employer breaches its reporting obligations, BUAK is entitled to calculate the wage supplements owed by the employer on the basis of BUAK’s own investigations, whereby, in that case, BUAK has a claim for wage supplements in the amount calculated by BUAK, irrespective of the actual circumstances of the posting or employment?










(1)  OJ 2012 L 351, p. 1.