Case C-46/17: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 28 February 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesarbeitsgericht Bremen — Germany) — Hubertus John v Freie Hansestadt Bremen (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 1999/70/EC — Framework Agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP — Successive fixed-term employment contracts — Clause 5(1) — Measures aimed at preventing the misuse of fixed-term contracts — Directive 2000/78/EC — Article 6(1) — Prohibition of discrimination on the ground of age — National legislation authorising the postponement of the end of the contract of employment fixed at the normal retirement age simply because that the worker qualified for a retirement pension)
Date: 2018-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European social policy, age discrimination, equal treatment, framework agreement, retirement conditions, temporary employment, termination of a contract, work contract








C_2018142EN.01001301.xml










23.4.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 142/13





Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 28 February 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesarbeitsgericht Bremen — Germany) — Hubertus John v Freie Hansestadt Bremen
(Case C-46/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Directive 1999/70/EC - Framework Agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP - Successive fixed-term employment contracts - Clause 5(1) - Measures aimed at preventing the misuse of fixed-term contracts - Directive 2000/78/EC - Article 6(1) - Prohibition of discrimination on the ground of age - National legislation authorising the postponement of the end of the contract of employment fixed at the normal retirement age simply because that the worker qualified for a retirement pension))
(2018/C 142/17)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesarbeitsgericht Bremen

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Hubertus John

Defendant: Freie Hansestadt Bremen

Operative part of the judgment







1)


Article 2(2) of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation must be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude a national provision such as that at issue in the main proceedings, to the extent that it makes the postponement of the date of termination of employment of workers who have reached the legal qualifying age for a retirement pension subject to the agreement of the employers given for a fixed term.










2)


Clause 5(1) of Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded on 18 March 1999, in the annex to Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP, must be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude a national provision, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, in so far as it permits the parties to a contract of employment, without additional requirements, indefinitely to postpone, by common agreement during the course of the employment relationship, including on more than one occasion if necessary, the agreed date of termination related to reaching the normal retirement age, simply because that worker, by reaching the normal retirement age, is entitled to a retirement pension.






(1)  OJ C 144, 8.5.2017.