CELEX: 62020CN0426
Language: en
Date: 2020-09-10 00:00:00
Title: Case C-426/20: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Judicial da Comarca de Braga — Juízo do Trabalho de Barcelos (Portugal) lodged on 10 September 2020 — GD, ES v Luso Temp — Empresa de Trabalho Temporário, S. A.

7.12.2020   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 423/27
            
         
      Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Judicial da Comarca de Braga — Juízo do Trabalho de Barcelos (Portugal) lodged on 10 September 2020 — GD, ES v Luso Temp — Empresa de Trabalho Temporário, S. A.
      (Case C-426/20)
      (2020/C 423/41)
      Language of the case: Portuguese
      
         Referring court
      
      Tribunal Judicial da Comarca de Braga — Juízo do Trabalho de Barcelos
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      
         Applicants: GD, ES
      
         Defendant: Luso Temp — Empresa de Trabalho Temporário, S. A.
      
         Question referred
      
      Do Article 3(1)(f) and Article 5(1) of Directive 2008/104/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on temporary agency work preclude a provision of law such as that in Article 185(6) of the Código do Trabalho (Employment Code) (adopted by Law No 7/2009 of 12 February [2009]), under which temporary agency workers are, in all cases, entitled to paid holiday and the corresponding holiday bonus pay only pro rata to the period of service in the user undertaking, even where their employment relationship commences in one calendar year and ends two or more calendar years later, whereas a worker recruited directly by the user undertaking who occupies the same job for the same period of time will be subject to the general holiday provisions, meaning that he or she will be entitled to a longer period of paid holiday and more holiday bonus pay, since these are not pro rata to the period of service?
      
         (1)  OJ 2008 L 327, p. 9.