CELEX: C2002/097/14
Language: en
Date: 2002-04-20 00:00:00
Title: Case C-59/02: Action brought on 25 February 2002 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Hellenic Republic

20.4.2002               EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                         C 97/7
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                 Action brought on 25 February 2002 by the Commission
                                                                            of the European Communities against the Hellenic Repub-
                                                                                                             lic
—     Declare that, by restricting the concept of ‘collective
      redundancies’ to redundancies for structural, technologi-                                       (Case C-59/02)
      cal or cyclical reasons, and by failing to extend the
      concept to redundancies for any other reason not specific
      to the workforce itself, the Portuguese Republic has failed                                    (2002/C 97/14)
      to fulfil its obligations under Articles 1, 6 and 7 of
      Directive 98/59/EC; (1)
                                                                            An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought before the
—     Order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.                       Court of Justice of the European Communities on 25 February
                                                                            2002 by the Commission of the European Communities,
                                                                            represented by Michel Nolin and Minas Konstantinidis, Legal
                                                                            Advisers.
                                                                            The Commission claims that the Court should:
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                            —     declare that, by not adopting or, in any event, by failing
                                                                                  to communicate to the Commission (all) the laws,
                                                                                  regulations and administrative provisions necessary to
The Commission takes the view that the concept of collective                      comply with Council Directive 1999/86/EC (1) of 11 No-
redundancies in Portuguese law does not cover all the cases of                    vember 1999 adapting to technical progress Directive
collective redundancies envisaged by the directive. For exam-                     76/763/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the
ple, it does not cover redundancies declared by an employer                       Member States relating to passenger seats for wheeled
for reasons unrelated to the workforce where the undertaking                      agricultural or forestry tractors, the Hellenic Republic has
is wound up or liquidated, sold, the premises burnt down or                       failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4 of that
other cases of force majeur, or where the undertaking has                         directive;
ceased trading on the death of its owner. The current situation
not only undermines the protection of workers, it is also                   —     order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.
manifestly contrary to the principle of legal certainty. Without
calling in question the constitutional provisions which guaran-
tee workers’ right to work, the Commission points out that in
any event that does not make good the inadequate transpo-                   Pleas in law and main arguments
sition of a directive whose purpose is to strengthen the
protection of workers in the event of collective redundancies
and to provide workers with certain guarantees as regards                   In accordance with the third paragraph of Article 249 EC,
observance of the rules and procedure for redundancies.                     directives are binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon
Thirdly, by relying on the case law and the rules of Portuguese             each Member State to which they are addressed.
law according to which the directive would not be applicable
to collective redundancies for reasons not specific to the
workforce, since such cases would be time-barred, the Portug-               Under the first paragraph of Article 10 EC, Member States are
uese authorities have improperly restricted the scope of the                to take all appropriate measures, whether general or particular,
directive. Finally, the Commission considers that to accept the             to ensure fulfilment of the obligations arising out of the Treaty
argument that application of the rules laid down in the                     or resulting from action taken by the institutions of the
directive is ‘not viable’ in those cases where termination of               Community.
the employment contract which under Portuguese law is
considered to limit rights of action, would amount to acknowl-
edging that a Member State may invoke provisions of domestic                It is not disputed by the Hellenic Republic that it must adopt
law to justify failure to fulfil its obligations under a Community          measures to comply with the abovementioned directive.
directive, which is manifestly contrary to Community law.
                                                                            The Commission records that until now, despite the expiry on
                                                                            1 January 2001 of the period laid down, the Hellenic Republic
(1) Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the approximation         has not adopted the appropriate measures for the full incorpor-
    of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundan-       ation of the directive at issue into Greek law.
    cies. OJ 1998 L 225, p. 16.
                                                                            (1) OJ L 297, 18.11.1999, p. 22.