CELEX: C2002/109/35
Language: en
Date: 2002-05-04 00:00:00
Title: Case C-18/02: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Arbejdsret by order of 25 January 2002 in the case of Danmarks Rederiforening acting on behalf of DFDS Torline A/S against LO Landsorganisation i Sverige, acting on behalf of SEKO Sjöfolk Facket för Service och Kommunikation

C 109/22                EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                       4.5.2002
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Arbejdsret by                  seamen on board that vessel can be regarded by the vessel’s
order of 25 January 2002 in the case of Danmarks                         owners as having occurred in the flag State, with the result
Rederiforening acting on behalf of DFDS Torline A/S                      that the vessel’s owners can, pursuant to Article 5(3), bring an
against LO Landsorganisation i Sverige, acting on behalf                 action for damages against the trade union in the flag State?
 of SEKO Sjöfolk Facket för Service och Kommunikation
                           (Case C-18/02)
                                                                         (1) 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and the enforcement of
                                                                             judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ L 204, 1975,
                          (2002/C 109/35)                                    p. 28) modified by the Convention of 26 May 1989 on the
                                                                             accession of the Kingdom of Spain and the Portuguese Republic
                                                                             with the adjustments made to them by the Convention on the
                                                                             accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, of Ireland and of the
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                       United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the
European Communities by order of the Arbejdsret (Labour                      adjustments made to them by the Convention on the accession of
Court) of 25 January 2002, received at the Court Registry on                 the Hellenic Republic (OJ L 285, 1989, p. 1).
29 January 2002, for a preliminary ruling in the case of
Danmarks Rederiforening (Danish Association of Shipping
Companies), acting on behalf of DFDS Torline A/S against
LO Landsorganisation i Sverige (Swedish Congress of Trade
Unions), acting on behalf of SEKO Sjöfolk Facket för Service
och Kommunikation (union representing maritime workers
in service and communications sectors) on the following
questions:
Question 1                                                               Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Oberster
                                                                         Gerichtshof by order of that Court of 20 December 2001
                                                                         in the case of Dr Viktor Hlozek against Roche Diagnostics
a)    Must Article 5(3) of the Convention (1) be construed                                       Gesellschaft mbH
      as covering cases concerning the legality of collective
      industrial action for the purpose of securing an agreement
      in a case where any harm which may result from the                                           (Case C-19/02)
      illegality of such collective action gives rise to liability to
      pay compensation under the rules on tort, delict or quasi-
      delict, such that a case concerning the legality of notified
      collective industrial action can be brought before the                                      (2002/C 109/36)
      courts of the place where proceedings may be instituted
      for compensation in respect of any harm resulting from
      that industrial action?
b)    Is it necessary, as the case may be, that any harm incurred        Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
      must be a certain or probable consequence of the                   European Communities by order of the Oberster Gerichtshof
      industrial action concerned in itself, or is it sufficient that    (Supreme Court) of 20 December 2001, received at the Court
      that industrial action is a necessary condition governing,         Registry on 29 January 2002, for a preliminary ruling in the
      and may constitute the basis for, sympathy actions which           case of Dr Viktor Hlozek against Roche Diagnostics Gesell-
      will result in harm?                                               schaft mbH on the following questions:
c)    Does it make any difference that implementation of
      notified collective industrial action was, after the proceed-
      ings had been brought, suspended by the notifying party            1.a)     Are Article 141 EC and Article 1 of Council Directive
      until the court’s ruling on the issue of its legality?             75/117/EEC of 10 February 1975 on the approximation of
                                                                         the laws of the Member States relating to the application of
                                                                         the principle of equal pay for men and women (OJ 1975 L 45,
                                                                         p. 19) to be interpreted
Question 2
                                                                         where an employer which dismisses a large group of employees
Must Article 5(3) of the Convention be construed as meaning              as a result of a merger with another company is required, on
that damage resulting from collective industrial action                  account of its social obligation towards the entire workforce,
implemented by a trade union in a country to which a vessel              to agree with the works council a social plan, which is binding
registered in another country (the flag State) sails for the             in relation to the employees, in order to alleviate the effects of
purpose of securing an agreement covering the work of                    dismissal, in particular the risk of age-related unemployment,