9 IN THAT RESPECT THE DANISH LAW IN QUESTION DOES NOT EXHIBIT THE CLARITY AND PRECISION NECESSARY FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE WORKERS CONCERNED . EVEN ACCEPTING THE ASSERTIONS OF THE DANISH GOVERNMENT THAT THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUAL PAY FOR MEN AND WOMEN , IN THE BROAD SENSE REQUIRED BY THE DIRECTIVE , IS IMPLEMENTED IN COLLECTIVE AGREEMENTS , IT HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN THAT THE SAME IMPLEMENTATION OF THAT PRINCIPLE IS GUARANTEED FOR WORKERS WHOSE RIGHTS ARE NOT DEFINED IN SUCH AGREEMENTS .
10 SINCE THOSE WORKERS ARE NOT UNIONIZED AND WORK IN SMALL OR MEDIUM-SIZED BUSINESSES , PARTICULAR CARE MUST BE TAKEN TO GUARANTEE THEIR RIGHTS UNDER THE DIRECTIVE . THE PRINCIPLES OF LEGAL CERTAINTY AND THE PROTECTION OF INDIVIDUALS THUS REQUIRE AN UNEQUIVOCAL WORDING WHICH WOULD GIVE THE PERSONS CONCERNED A CLEAR AND PRECISE UNDERSTANDING OF THEIR RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS AND WOULD ENABLE THE COURTS TO ENSURE THAT THOSE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS ARE OBSERVED .
11 IN THIS CASE IT APPEARS THAT THE WORDING OF THE DANISH LAW DOES NOT FULFIL THOSE CONDITIONS INASMUCH AS IT SETS OUT THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUAL PAY WITHOUT SPEAKING OF WORK OF EQUAL VALUE , THUS RESTRICTING THE SCOPE OF THE PRINCIPLE . THE FACT THAT IN THE PREAMBLE TO THE DRAFT LAW THE GOVERNMENT STATED THAT THE EXPRESSION ' SAME WORK ' WAS INTERPRETED IN DENMARK IN SO BROAD A SENSE THAT THE ADDITION OF THE EXPRESSION ' WORK TO WHICH EQUAL VALUE IS ATTRIBUTED ' WOULD NOT ENTAIL ANY REAL EXTENSION IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO ENSURE THAT THE PERSONS CONCERNED ARE ADEQUATELY INFORMED .
12 THE RELEVANCE OF THOSE CONSIDERATIONS IS NOT AFFECTED BY THE FACT THAT DURING THE PREPARATORY WORK WHICH LED TO THE ADOPTION OF DIRECTIVE NO 75/117 THE DANISH GOVERNMENT ENTERED A DECLARATION IN THE COUNCIL MINUTES TO THE EFFECT THAT ' DENMARK IS OF THE VIEW THAT THE EXPRESSION ' ' SAME WORK ' ' CAN CONTINUE TO BE USED IN THE CONTEXT OF DANISH LABOUR LAW ' .
13 THE COURT HAS CONSISTENTLY HELD THAT SUCH UNILATERAL DECLARATIONS CANNOT BE RELIED UPON FOR THE INTERPRETATION OF COMMUNITY MEASURES , SINCE THE OBJECTIVE SCOPE OF RULES LAID DOWN BY THE COMMON INSTITUTIONS CANNOT BE MODIFIED BY RESERVATIONS OR OBJECTIONS WHICH MEMBER STATES MAY HAVE MADE AT THE TIME THE RULES WERE BEING FORMULATED .
14 THE CONCLUSION MUST THEREFORE BE THAT THE KINGDOM OF DENMARK HAS FAILED TO FULFIL ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 1 OF DIRECTIVE NO 75/117 BY FAILING , IN THE TEXT OF LAW NO 32 OF 4 FEBRUARY 1976 , TO EXTEND THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUAL PAY TO WORK OF EQUAL VALUE . SINCE THAT FINDING IMPLIES THAT THE LAW IN QUESTION DOES NOT ENSURE THAT EMPLOYEES WHO CONSIDER THEMSELVES WRONGED BY FAILURE TO APPLY THAT PRINCIPLE IN A CASE OF WORK OF EQUAL VALUE ARE ABLE TO PURSUE THEIR CLAIMS BY JUDICIAL PROCESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 3 OF THE DIRECTIVE , THERE IS NO NEED TO