CELEX: C1996/294/07
Language: en
Date: 1996-10-05 00:00:00
Title: References for a preliminary ruling from the Landesarbeitsgericht Hamm by orders of that court of 9 July 1996 in the cases of Helmut Kampelmann v. Landschaftsverband Westfalen-Lippe (C-253/96), Wilfried Tilsch v. Landschaftsverband Westfalen-Lippe (C-254/96), Dieter Klingelhöfer v. Landschaftsverband Westfalen-Lippe (C-255/96), Heinrich Schmidt v. Landschaftsverband Westfalen-Lippe (C-256/96), Stadtwerke Witten GmbH v. Andreas Schade (C-257/96) and Klaus Haseley v. Stadtwerke Altena GmbH (C-258/96) (Cases C-253/96 to C-258/96)

No C 294/4              EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                        5 . 10 . 96
    essentially the same employees continue to perform the              Are Presidential Decree No 915 of 10 September 1982 ( )
    same surveillance duties on essentially the same terms ,            and current Italian legislation in general relating to waste
    which are determined to a large extent by the body                  and secondary raw materials compatible with Directive
    awarding the contract ?                                             91 / 156/EEC of 18 March 1991 ( 2 )?
(') OJ No L 61 , 5 . 3 . 1977, p . 26 .                                 (') Erroneously given as 1992 in the order for reference .
                                                                        ( 2 ) OJ No L 78 , 1991 , p. 32 .
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Civile
e Penale, Brescia, by order of that court of 12 April 1996, in          References for a preliminary ruling from the
                                                                        Landesarbeitsgericht Hamm by orders of that court of 9 July
the criminal proceedings pending before it against Riccardo
                                Piccaluga                               1996 in the cases of Helmut Kampelmann v.
                                                                        Landschaftsverband Westfalen-Lippe ( C-253/96 ), Wilfried
                         ( Case C-250/96                                Tilsch v. Landschaftsverband Westfalen-Lippe ( C-254/96 ),
                            ( 96/C 294/05 )                             Dieter Klingelhöfer v. Landschaftsverband Westfalen-Lippe
                                                                        ( C-255/96 ), Heinrich Schmidt v. Landschaftsverband
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                  Westfalen-Lippe ( C-256/96 ), Stadtwerke Witten GmbH v.
European Communities by an order of the Tribunale Civile                Andreas Schade ( C-257/96 ) and Klaus Haseley v.
e Penale ( Civil and Criminal District Court), Brescia , of                            Stadtwerke Altena GmbH ( C-258/96 )
12 April 1996 , which was received at the Court Registry on                               ( Cases C-253/96 to C-258/96 )
22 July 1996 , for a preliminary ruling in the criminal
                                                                                                     ( 96/C 294/07
proceedings pending before it against Riccardo Piccaluga on
the following questions :
                                                                        Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                                                                        European Communities by orders of the Fourth Chamber of
1 . May the provisions of Italian law concerning                        the Landesarbeitsgericht ( Higher Labour Court ) Hamm of
    employment procurement and temporary work be                        9 July 1996 , which were received at the Court Registry on
    regarded as covered by the exercise of official authority           23 July 1996 , for a preliminary ruling in the cases of Helmut
    within the meaning of Article 66 in conjunction with                Kampelmann , Wilfried Tilsch , Dieter Klingelhöfer and
    Article 55 of the Treaty, in the light of their public-law
                                                                        Heinrich Schmidt v. Landesverband Westfalen-Lippe,
    character, inasmuch as they are intended to protect                 Stadtwerke Witten GmbH v. Andreas Schade and Klaus
    workers and the national economy ?
                                                                        Haseley v. Stadtwerke Altena GmbH for a preliminary
                                                                        ruling on the following questions :
2 . In the absence of specific implementing provisions , may
    the aforesaid provisions be regarded as directly                     1 . In view of the objective , stated in the preamble to
     applicable ( thereby undermining the public-law                           Council Directive 91 /533/EEC on an employer's
     objectives pursued by the Italian laws in force relating to              obligation to inform employees of the conditions
     employment procurement and temporary work ) and do                        applicable to the contract or employment
     they permit any person , whether public or private, to act               relationship ( J ), of 'providing employees with improved
     as an intermediary between persons seeking and persons                   protection against possible infringements of their rights
     offering employment and/or temporary work, without                        and to create greater transparency on the labour
     any specific control or authorization , where the                         market', is it the purpose of Article 2 of the said
     Member State is unable to satisfy fully the demand for                    Directive to modify ( in the employee 's favour ) the
     services on the labour market using its own                               burden of proof in that the list of minimum
     administrative machinery ?                                                requirements in Article 2 ( 2 ) of Directive 91 /533/EEC is
                                                                               intended to ensure that the employee does not encounter
                                                                               difficulties of proof regarding the listed points when
                                                                               enforcing his contractual rights in employment-law
                                                                               disputes ?
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Pretura
Circondariale, Rovigo ( Sezione Distaccata de Adria ), by                2 . If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative : has
 order of that court of 13 July 1993 in criminal proceedings                   Article 2 ( 2 ) (c ) ( ii ) of Directive 91 /533/EEC been
                   against Giuseppe Cordelia                                   directly applicable since 1 July 1993 against the State
                          ( Case C-251 /96 )                                   acting as an employer in private law because :
                             ( 96/C 294/06 )                                   — the Federal Republic of Germany did not
                                                                                   ( completely ) implement Directive 91 /533/EEC by
 Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                            30 June 1993 , the expiry date of the period for
 European Communities by order of the Pretura                                      implementation ,
 Circondariale ( District Magistrate 's Court ), Rovigo ( Adria
 Division ), of 13 July 1 993 , which was received at the Court                — the abovementioned provision of the Directive is
 Registry on 22 July 1996 , for a preliminary ruling in                            unconditional and can therefore be incorporated in
 criminal proceedings pending before it against Giuseppe                           national law without any further implementing
 Cordelia on the following question :                                               act ,
 ---pagebreak--- 5 . 10 . 96             EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                      No C 294/5
     — the Directive confers upon the individual employee                Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Corte d'Appello
         rights against the State acting as employer ?                   ( Sezione Prima Civile ), Venice, by order of that court of
                                                                         1 8 April 1996 in the case of Ministero delle Finanze v. SPAC
3 . If the answer to Question 2 is in the affirmative : must the                                           SpA
     information which the employer is required to give                                           ( Case C-260/96 )
     under Article 2 ( 2 ) ( c ) ( ii ) of Directive 91 /533/EEC                                    ( 96/C 294/08 )
     concerning the ' nature or category of the work ' be
     understood as meaning the classification of a job in the
     sense that, if the employee 's grading according to the             Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
     salary scheme under a collective agreement requires                 European Communities by order of the Corte d'Appello
     fulfilment of the work specifications of a particular case          ( Sezione Prima Civile ) ( Court of Appeal , First Civil
     of a salary grade, he must be able to see , from the                Division ), Venice, of 18 April 1996 , which was received at
     notification of his grading in a particular salary grade            the Court Registry on 24 July 1 996 , for a preliminary ruling
     and case , whether he is entitled to                                in the case of Ministero delle Finanze v. SPAC SpA on the
                                                                         following question :
     — advancement on the basis of a continuous period of
         satisfactory service or advancement by case in salary
         grades ( C-253/96 ),                                            In proceedings before an Italian court for reimbursement of
                                                                         charges paid pursuant to provisions of national law which,
     — advancement on the basis of a continuous period                   in view of the interpretation given by the Court of Justice in
         of satisfactory service ( C-254/96 , C-255/96 ,                 Joined Cases C-71 /91 and C-178/91 Ponente Carni and
         C-2 56/96 ),                                                    Another v. Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato,
                                                                         conflict with Article 10 of Council Directive 69/335/EEC of
     — advancement on the basis of a continuous period of                17 July 1969 ( 1 ), is a provision of national law which , by
         satisfactory service and/or advancement by case                 removing such actions from the scope of the ordinary rules
          ( C-257/96 , C-258/96 )?                                       governing actions for the recovery of charges unduly paid,
                                                                         and making them subject to special rules governing the
                                                                         reimbursement of charges paid in error, requires that the
4 . If the answer to Question 3 is in the affirmative : does the         right of action be exercised within a limitation period
     notification pursuant to Article 2 ( 2 ) ( c ) ( ii ) of Directive  running from the time when payment was made rather than
     91 /533/EEC bind the employer in the sense that he is               from the time when the relevant Community Directive was
     bound by the classification of the job notified to the              correctly transposed into national law, compatible with the
     employee until such time as he ( the employer ) proves              principles laid down in that Directive and adopted in its
     that the grading was incorrect, or at least until he shows          interpretation , and the general principles of Community law
     conclusively ( perhaps in the form of a job'assessment )            upheld by the Court of Justice in Case C-208/91 ?
     that he graded the employee mistakenly or that the
     classification of the work has been lowered in the course
     of     time    or  by   amendment        to    the       collective (') OJ, English Special Edition 1969 ( II ), p. 412 .
     agreement ?
5 . If the answer to Question 4 is in the affirmative : is the
     implementation in German law of Article 9 ( 2 ) of
     Directive 91 /533/EEC by the Information Act of 20 July
     1995 ( Bundesgesetzblatt I, p. 946 ), to the effect that the
     employer has no obligation to give the employee written             Appeal brought on 7 August 1996 by 1 . the Stichting
     notification in the case of an employment relationship in           Certificatie Kraanverhuurbedrijf and 2 . the Federatie van
     existence when the Act comes into force , ' if and so far as        Nederlandse Kraanverhuurbedrijven against the order
     an     earlier   document    or    a   written       contract    of
                                                                         made on 4 June 1996 by the Court of First Instance of the
     employment gives the particulars required '                         European Communities in Case T-18/96 R between 1 . the
     ( paragraph 4 , sentence 2 , of the Information Act ), to be        Stichting Certificatie Kraanverhuurbedrijf and 2 . the
     regarded as in conformity with Community law, with                  Federatie van Nederlandse Kraanverhuurbedrijven, and the
     the consequence that such earlier notifications which                         Commission of the European Communities
     satisfy the requirements of Directive 91 /533/EEC ,
     whether it has been implemented or whether, in the                                       ( Case C-268/96 P ( R ))
     absence of implementation , it is directly applicable ,                                         ( 96/C 294/09 )
     continue to be valid , with the consequence that, if the
     employer gives a more recent written notification ( in the
     present case , in the course of proceedings ) which                 An appeal against the order made on 4 June 1996 by the
     conflicts with the earlier one, he must prove that the              Court of First Instance of the European Communities in
     later notification is correct ?                                     Case T-18/96 R between 1 . the Stichting Certificatie
                                                                         Kraanverhuurbedrijf and 2 . the Federatie van Nederlandse
                                                                         Kraanverhuurbedrijven, and the Commission of the
(') OJ No L 288 , 18 . 10 . 1991 , p . 32 .
                                                                         European Communities, was brought before the Court of
                                                                         Justice of the European Communities on 7 August 19 96 by
                                                                          1 . the Stichting Certificatie Kraanverhuurbedrijf and 2 . the