CELEX: C2006/048/12
Language: en
Date: 2006-02-25 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of  15 December 2005  in Joined Cases C-232/04 and C-233/04, Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeitsgericht Düsseldorf Nurten Güney-Görres, Gul Demir v Securicor Aviation (Germany) Ltd, Kötter Aviation Security GmbH & Co. KG (Directive 2001/23/CE — Article 1 — Transfer of undertaking or business — Safeguarding of employees' rights — Scope)

25.2.2006   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 48/6
            
         
      JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
   
   (Third Chamber)
   of 15 December 2005
   in Joined Cases C-232/04 and C-233/04, Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeitsgericht Düsseldorf Nurten Güney-Görres, Gul Demir v Securicor Aviation (Germany) Ltd, Kötter Aviation Security GmbH & Co. KG (1)
   
   (Directive 2001/23/CE - Article 1 - Transfer of undertaking or business - Safeguarding of employees' rights - Scope)
   (2006/C 48/12)
   Language of the case: German
   In Joined Cases C-232/04 and C-233/04: reference for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the Arbeitsgericht Düsseldorf (Germany), made by decision of 5 May 2004, received at the Court on 3 June 2004, in the proceedings between Nurten Güney-Görres (C-232/04), Gul Demir (C-233/04) and Securicor Aviation (Germany) Ltd, Kötter Aviation Security GmbH & Co. KG — the Court (Third Chamber), composed of A. Rosas, President of the Chamber, J.-P. Puissochet, S. von Bahr, A. Borg Barthet (Rapporteur) and U. Lõhmus, Judges; M. Poiares Maduro, Advocate General; K. Sztranc, Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 15 December 2005, the operative part of which is as follows:
   Article 1 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, must be interpreted as meaning that in examining whether there is a transfer of an undertaking or business within the meaning of that article, in the context of a fresh award of a contract and having regard to all the facts, the transfer of the assets for independent commercial use is not an essential criterion for a finding that there was a transfer of those assets from the original contractor to the new contractor.
   
      (1)  OJ C 228 of 11.09.2004.
   
      OJ C 201 of 07.08.2004.