CELEX: E2004J0002
Language: en
Date: 2004-12-10 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court of  10 December 2004  in Case E-2/04 Reidar Rasmussen, Jan Rossavik, and Johan Käldman, and Total E&P Norge AS, v/styrets formann (chairman of the board)  (Transfer of undertakings — Council Directive 77/187/EEC — time of transfer — objection to transfer of employment relationship)

23.2.2006   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 45/11
            
         
      JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
   
   of 10 December 2004
   in Case E-2/04 Reidar Rasmussen, Jan Rossavik, and Johan Käldman, and Total E&P Norge AS, v/styrets formann (chairman of the board)
   
      (Transfer of undertakings — Council Directive 77/187/EEC — time of transfer — objection to transfer of employment relationship)
   
   (2006/C 45/07)
   In Case E-2/04 between Reidar Rasmussen, Jan Rossavik, and Johan Käldman, and Total E&P Norge AS, v/styrets formann (chairman of the board) — REQUEST to the Court by Gulating lagmannsrett (Gulating Court of Appeal), on the interpretation of Article 1 and Article 3(1) of Council Directive 77/187/EEC of 14 February 1977, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Tresselt and Thorgeir Örlygsson (Judge-Rapporteur), Judges, gave judgment on 10 December 2004, the operative part of which is as follows:
   
               1.
            
            
               An entity within the meaning of Article 1(1)(b) of Directive 77/187/EEC of 14 February 1977 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 part of businesses as amended by Directive 98/50/EC and incorporated into the EEA Agreement may retain its identity in a situation where part of an undertaking is transferred from one company to another that carries out the same or corresponding activities together with another affiliated company within the same group of companies, and where each company takes over some of the employees in question.
            
         
               2.
            
            
               The application of the Directive, pursuant to Article 1, is not precluded when the maintenance and support functions of an undertaking are transferred while the production function is not, and the employees of all these functions work as a team both before and after the transfer.
            
         
               3.
            
            
               The Directive may, pursuant to Article 1, be applicable in the situation of a transfer of maintenance tasks on a fixed offshore installation for gas production where a considerable part of the workforce, in terms of numbers and qualifications, that performed the transferred function is taken over by a company that continues to carry out these tasks on the same installation. The application of the Directive is not precluded by the mere fact that the ownership of the tools and instruments, which the maintenance staff used before the transaction in question, and which they have continued to use afterwards, is not taken over by the company in question.
            
         
               4.
            
            
               Article 3(1) of the Directive is to be interpreted to the effect that employment relationships are transferred to the transferee simultaneously with and by virtue of the transfer of the undertaking for those employees who have not, prior to the time of transfer, declared that they do not wish to work for the transferee.