mizuumi1/LegalViz huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: Czech

Dne 5. července 2015 informovala T. Vandenbon společnost WTG Retail, že v osobě J. Hakelbracht našla vhodnou uchazečku. Odpovědná pracovnice oddělení lidských zdrojů tohoto podniku jí však elektronickou poštou ze dne 6. července 2015 sdělila, že nechce J. Hakelbracht zaměstnat z důvodu jejího těhotenství.
Elektronickou poštou ze dne 7. července 2015 T. Vandenbon upozornila společnost WTG Retail, že takové odmítnutí přijetí do zaměstnání z důvodu těhotenství je zákonem zakázáno. Dne 12. srpna 2015 se však dozvěděla, že společnost WTG Retail potvrdila rozhodnutí nezaměstnat J. Hakelbracht ze stejného důvodu.
Tine Vandenbon informovala ve stejný den J. Hakelbracht, že její žádost o pracovní místo byla zamítnuta z důvodu jejího těhotenství.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"Elektronickou poštou 06/07/2015";
  "Elektronickou poštou 06/07/2015"->"T. Vandenbon Vandenbon";
  "Elektronickou poštou 06/07/2015"->"že nechce J. Hakelbracht zaměstnat z důvodu jejího těhotenství.."[dir=none];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="informovala T. Vandenbon společnost WTG Retail, že v osobě J. Hakelbracht našla vhodnou uchazečku. Hakelbracht"];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"odmítnutí přijetí do zaměstnání z důvodu těhotenství je zákonem zakázáno.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit T. Vandenbon Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"T. Vandenbon Hakelbracht"[lable="Tine Vandenbon informovala ve stejný den J. Hakelbracht, že její žádost o pracovní místo byla zamítnuta z důvodu jejího těhotenství.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: Danish

Den 5. juli 2015 informerede Tine Vandenbon WTG Retail om, at Jamina Hakelbracht var en passende ansøger til stillingen. Den ansvarlige for menneskelige ressourcer i denne virksomhed fortalte hende imidlertid ved e-mail af 6. juli 2015, at Jamina Hakelbracht ikke skulle ansættes på grund af hendes graviditet.
Ved e-mail af 7. juli 2015 gjorde Tine Vandenbon WTG Retail opmærksom på, at et sådant afslag på ansættelse på grund af graviditet var forbudt ved lov. Den 12. august 2015 fik hun ikke desto mindre at vide, at WTG Retail fastholdt afslaget på at ansætte Jamina Hakelbracht af denne grund.
Samme dag informerede Tine Vandenbon Jamina Hakelbracht om, at hendes ansøgning ikke var blevet imødekommet på grund af hendes graviditet.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Tine Vandenbon, Jamina Hakelbracht Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"Ved e-mail af 06/07/2015";
  "Ved e-mail af 06/07/2015"->"Tine Vandenbon, Jamina Hakelbracht Vandenbon";
  "Ved e-mail af 06/07/2015"->"WTG Retail fastholdt afslaget på at ansætte Jamina Hakelbracht af denne grund.."[dir=none];
  "Tine Vandenbon, Jamina Hakelbracht Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="Jamina Hakelbracht var en passende ansøger Hakelbracht"];
  "Tine Vandenbon, Jamina Hakelbracht Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"Et afslag på ansættelse på grund af graviditet var forbudt ved lov.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"Tine Vandenbon, Jamina Hakelbracht Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit Tine Vandenbon, Jamina Hakelbracht Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "Tine Vandenbon, Jamina Hakelbracht Vandenbon"->"Tine Vandenbon, Jamina Hakelbracht Hakelbracht"[lable="informerede Tine Vandenbon Jamina Hakelbracht om, at hendes ansøgning ikke var blevet imødekommet på grund af hendes graviditet.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: German

Am 5. Juli 2015 informierte Frau Vandenbon WTG Retail darüber, dass sie in der Person von Frau Hakelbracht eine geeignete Kandidatin gefunden habe. Die für Personal Verantwortliche dieses Unternehmens ließ sie mit E‑Mail vom 6. Juli 2015 aber wissen, dass sie Frau Hakelbracht wegen deren Schwangerschaft nicht einstellen wolle.
Mit E‑Mail vom 7. Juli 2015 wies Frau Vandenbon WTG Retail darauf hin, dass es gesetzlich verboten sei, eine Einstellung wegen Schwangerschaft abzulehnen. Dennoch erfuhr sie am 12. August 2015, dass WTG Retail die Ablehnung, Frau Hakelbracht einzustellen, aus demselben Grund bestätigte.
Am gleichen Tag teilte Frau Vandenbon Frau Hakelbracht mit, dass ihre Bewerbung wegen ihrer Schwangerschaft nicht erfolgreich gewesen sei.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Frau Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"E‑Mail vom 06/07/2015";
  "E‑Mail vom 06/07/2015"->"Frau Vandenbon";
  "E‑Mail vom 06/07/2015"->"dass sie Frau Hakelbracht wegen deren Schwangerschaft nicht einstellen wolle.."[dir=none];
  "Frau Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="Frau Hakelbracht eine geeignete Kandidatin gefunden habe. Hakelbracht"];
  "Frau Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"dass es gesetzlich verboten sei, eine Einstellung wegen Schwangerschaft abzulehnen.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"Frau Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit Frau Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "Frau Vandenbon"->"Frau Hakelbracht"[lable="teilte Frau Vandenbon Frau Hakelbracht mit, dass ihre Bewerbung wegen ihrer Schwangerschaft nicht erfolgreich gewesen sei.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: Estonian

T. Vandenbon teatas 5. juulil 2015 WTG Retailile, et on J. Hakelbrachti näol leidnud sobiva kandidaadi. Selle äriühingu personalihalduse eest vastutav töötaja andis talle 6. juuli 2015. aasta elektronkirjaga sellegipoolest teada, et ei soovi J. Hakelbrachti tööle võtta, sest viimane on rase.
T. Vandenbon juhtis 7. juuli 2015. aasta elektronkirjaga WTG Retaili tähelepanu asjaolule, et töölevõtmisest keeldumine raseduse tõttu on seadusega keelatud. Sellegipoolest sai ta 12. augustil 2015 teada, et WTG Retail jäi otsuse juurde, et keeldub samal põhjusel J. Hakelbrachti tööle võtmast.
Samal päeval andis T. Vandenbon J. Hakelbrachtile teada, et ta ei osutunud valituks tema raseduse tõttu.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"elektronkirjaga 06/07/2015";
  "elektronkirjaga 06/07/2015"->"J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon";
  "elektronkirjaga 06/07/2015"->"ei soovi J. Hakelbrachti tööle võtta, sest viimane on rase.."[dir=none];
  "J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="J. Hakelbrachti näol leidnud sobiva kandidaadi. Hakelbracht"];
  "J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"Töölevõtmisest keeldumine raseduse tõttu on seadusega keelatud.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit J. Hakelbracht Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"->"J. Hakelbracht Hakelbracht"[lable="Andis T. Vandenbon J. Hakelbrachtile teada, et ta ei osutunud valituks tema raseduse tõttu.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: Greek

Στις 5 Ιουλίου 2015, η Τ. Vandenbon γνωστοποίησε στη WTG Retail ότι θεωρούσε την J. Hakelbracht κατάλληλη υποψήφια. Ωστόσο, η υπεύθυνη ανθρώπινου δυναμικού της επιχείρησης αυτής την ενημέρωσε, με μήνυμα ηλεκτρονικού ταχυδρομείου της 6ης Ιουλίου 2015, ότι δεν ήθελε να προσλάβει την J. Hakelbracht λόγω της εγκυμοσύνης της.
Με μήνυμα ηλεκτρονικού ταχυδρομείου της 7ης Ιουλίου 2015, η Τ. Vandenbon επισήμανε στη WTG Retail ότι μια τέτοια άρνηση πρόσληψης λόγω εγκυμοσύνης απαγορευόταν από τον νόμο. Εντούτοις, στις 12 Αυγούστου 2015, πληροφορήθηκε ότι η WTG Retail επιβεβαίωσε την άρνηση πρόσληψης της J. Hakelbracht για τον ίδιο λόγο.
Η Τ. Vandenbon ενημέρωσε, αυθημερόν, την J. Hakelbracht ότι η υποψηφιότητά της δεν έγινε δεκτή λόγω της εγκυμοσύνης της.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Τ. Vandenbon Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"μήνυμα ηλεκτρονικού ταχυδρομείου 06/07/2015";
  "μήνυμα ηλεκτρονικού ταχυδρομείου 06/07/2015"->"Τ. Vandenbon Vandenbon";
  "μήνυμα ηλεκτρονικού ταχυδρομείου 06/07/2015"->"δεν ήθελε να προσλάβει την J. Hakelbracht λόγω της εγκυμοσύνης της."[dir=none];
  "Τ. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="Η Τ. Vandenbon γνωστοποίησε στη WTG Retail ότι θεωρούσε την J. Hakelbracht κατάλληλη υποψήφια. Hakelbracht"];
  "Τ. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"μια τέτοια άρνηση πρόσληψης λόγω εγκυμοσύνης απαγορευόταν από τον νόμο.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"Τ. Vandenbon Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit Τ. Vandenbon Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "Τ. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"Τ. Vandenbon Hakelbracht"[lable="Η Τ. Vandenbon ενημέρωσε, αυθημερόν, την J. Hakelbracht ότι η υποψηφιότητά της δεν έγινε δεκτή λόγω της εγκυμοσύνης της.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: French

Le 5 juillet 2015, Mme Vandenbon a informé WTG Retail qu’elle avait trouvé une candidate appropriée en la personne de Mme Hakelbracht. Toutefois, la responsable des ressources humaines de cette entreprise lui a fait savoir, par courrier électronique du 6 juillet 2015, ne pas vouloir engager Mme Hakelbracht en raison de sa grossesse.
Par courrier électronique du 7 juillet 2015, Mme Vandenbon a signalé à WTG Retail qu’un tel refus d’embauche pour cause de grossesse était interdit par la loi. Néanmoins, le 12 août 2015, elle a appris que WTG Retail confirmait le refus de recruter Mme Hakelbracht pour la même raison.
Le même jour, Mme Vandenbon a informé Mme Hakelbracht que sa candidature n’avait pas été retenue en raison de sa grossesse.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Mme Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"courrier électronique du 06/07/2015";
  "courrier électronique du 06/07/2015"->"Mme Vandenbon";
  "courrier électronique du 06/07/2015"->"ne pas vouloir engager Mme Hakelbracht en raison de sa grossesse.."[dir=none];
  "Mme Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="Mme Vandenbon a informé WTG Retail qu’elle avait trouvé une candidate appropriée en la personne de Mme Hakelbracht. Hakelbracht"];
  "Mme Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"un tel refus d’embauche pour cause de grossesse était interdit par la loi.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"Mme Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit Mme Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "Mme Vandenbon"->"Mme Hakelbracht"[lable="Mme Vandenbon a informé Mme Hakelbracht que sa candidature n’avait pas été retenue en raison de sa grossesse.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: Croatian

T. Vandenbon 5. srpnja 2015. priopćila je društvu WTG Retail da je J. Hakelbracht prikladna kandidatkinja. Međutim, elektroničkom poštom od 6. srpnja 2015. voditeljica ljudskih potencijala tog poduzeća povratno je obavijestila T. Vandenbon da ne želi zaposliti J. Hakelbracht zbog njezine trudnoće.
Elektroničkom poštom od 7. srpnja 2015. T. Vandenbon upozorila je društvo WTG Retail da je takvo odbijanje zapošljavanja zbog trudnoće zabranjeno zakonom. Unatoč tomu, ona je 12. kolovoza 2015. saznala da je društvo WTG Retail potvrdilo odbijanje zapošljavanja J. Hakelbracht zbog tog razloga.
T. Vandenbon istoga je dana obavijestila J. Hakelbracht da je njezina kandidatura odbijena zbog njezine trudnoće.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"elektroničkom poštom od 6. srpnja 2015. 06/07/2015";
  "elektroničkom poštom od 6. srpnja 2015. 06/07/2015"->"T. Vandenbon Vandenbon";
  "elektroničkom poštom od 6. srpnja 2015. 06/07/2015"->"ne želi zaposliti J. Hakelbracht zbog njezine trudnoće.."[dir=none];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="J. Hakelbracht prikladna kandidatkinja. Hakelbracht"];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"odbijanje zapošljavanja zbog trudnoće zabranjeno zakonom.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit T. Vandenbon Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"T. Vandenbon Hakelbracht"[lable="T. Vandenbon istoga je dana obavijestila J. Hakelbracht da je njezina kandidatura odbijena zbog njezine trudnoće.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: Italian

Il 5 luglio 2015 la sig.ra Vandenbon ha informato la WTG Retail di aver trovato una candidata idonea nella persona della sig.ra Hakelbracht. Tuttavia, la responsabile delle risorse umane di tale impresa le ha comunicato, con messaggio di posta elettronica del 6 luglio 2015, di non voler assumere la sig.ra Hakelbracht a causa della sua gravidanza.
Con messaggio di posta elettronica del 7 luglio 2015, la sig.ra Vandenbon ha segnalato alla WTG Retail che tale rifiuto di assunzione a causa della gravidanza era vietato dalla legge. Ciononostante, il 12 agosto 2015, ella ha appreso che la WTG Retail confermava il rifiuto di assumere la sig.ra Hakelbracht per lo stesso motivo.
Lo stesso giorno, la sig.ra Vandenbon ha informato la sig.ra Hakelbracht che la sua candidatura non era stata accolta a causa della sua gravidanza.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "sig.ra Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"messaggio di posta elettronica 06/07/2015";
  "messaggio di posta elettronica 06/07/2015"->"sig.ra Vandenbon";
  "messaggio di posta elettronica 06/07/2015"->"di non voler assumere la sig.ra Hakelbracht a causa della sua gravidanza.."[dir=none];
  "sig.ra Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="ha informato la WTG Retail di aver trovato una candidata idonea nella persona della sig.ra Hakelbracht. Hakelbracht"];
  "sig.ra Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"tale rifiuto di assunzione a causa della gravidanza era vietato dalla legge.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"sig.ra Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit sig.ra Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "sig.ra Vandenbon"->"sig.ra Hakelbracht"[lable="ha informato la sig.ra Hakelbracht che la sua candidatura non era stata accolta a causa della sua gravidanza.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: Latvian

2015. gada 5. jūlijāT. Vandenbon informēja WTG Retail, ka viņa ir atradusi piemērotu kandidāti, proti, J. Hakelbracht. Taču šī uzņēmuma personāldaļas vadītājs ar 2015. gada 6. jūlija e‑pasta vēstuli viņai paziņoja, ka nevēlas pieņemt darbā J. Hakelbracht grūtniecības dēļ.
T. Vandenbon ar 2015. gada 7. jūlija e‑pasta vēstuli paziņoja WTG Retail, ka šāds atteikums pieņemt darbā grūtniecības dēļ ir aizliegts ar likumu. Tomēr 2015. gada 12. augustā viņa uzzināja, ka WTG Retail apstiprina, ka tas atsakās pieņemt darbā J. Hakelbracht šī paša iemesla dēļ.
Šajā pašā dienā T. Vandenbon informēja J. Hakelbracht, ka viņas kandidatūra netika pieņemta grūtniecības dēļ.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"2015. gada 7. jūlija e‑pasta vēstuli 06/07/2015";
  "2015. gada 7. jūlija e‑pasta vēstuli 06/07/2015"->"T. Vandenbon Vandenbon";
  "2015. gada 7. jūlija e‑pasta vēstuli 06/07/2015"->"nevēlas pieņemt darbā J. Hakelbracht grūtniecības dēļ.."[dir=none];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="T. Vandenbon informēja WTG Retail, ka viņa ir atradusi piemērotu kandidāti, proti, J. Hakelbracht. Hakelbracht"];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"atteikums pieņemt darbā grūtniecības dēļ ir aizliegts ar likumu.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit T. Vandenbon Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"T. Vandenbon Hakelbracht"[lable="informēja J. Hakelbracht, ka viņas kandidatūra netika pieņemta grūtniecības dēļ.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: Lithuanian

2015 m. liepos 5 d. T. Vandenbon informavo WTG Retail, kad rado tinkamą kandidatę – J. Hakelbracht. Tačiau už žmogiškuosius išteklius šioje įmonėje atsakingas asmuo ją 2015 m. liepos 6 d. elektroniniu laišku informavo, kad nepageidauja įdarbinti J. Hakelbracht dėl jos nėštumo.
2015 m. liepos 7 d. elektroniniu laišku T.Vandenbon pranešė WTG Retail, kad toks atsisakymas įdarbinti dėl nėštumo draudžiamas įstatymo. Nepaisant to, 2015 m. rugpjūčio 12 d. ji sužinojo, kad WTG Retail patvirtino atsisakymą įdarbinti J. Hakelbracht dėl tos pačios priežasties.
Tą pačią dieną T. Vandenbon pranešė J. Hakelbracht, kad jos kandidatūra nebuvo pasirinkta dėl jos nėštumo.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"elektroniniu laišku 06/07/2015";
  "elektroniniu laišku 06/07/2015"->"J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon";
  "elektroniniu laišku 06/07/2015"->"Nepageidauja įdarbinti J. Hakelbracht dėl jos nėštumo.."[dir=none];
  "J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="informavo, kad rado tinkamą kandidatę – J. Hakelbracht. Hakelbracht"];
  "J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"toks atsisakymas įdarbinti dėl nėštumo draudžiamas įstatymo.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit J. Hakelbracht Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"->"J. Hakelbracht Hakelbracht"[lable="Pranešė J. Hakelbracht, kad jos kandidatūra nebuvo pasirinkta dėl jos nėštumo.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: Hungarian

2015. július 5‑én T. Vandenbon arról tájékoztatta a WTG Retailt, hogy J. Hakelbracht személyében megfelelő pályázót talált. Mindazonáltal e vállalkozás személyzeti ügyekért felelőse 2015. július 6‑i elektronikus levelében tudatta vele, hogy J. Hakelbrachtot terhessége miatt nem kívánja alkalmazni.
2015. július 7‑i elektronikus levelében T. Vandenbon jelezte a WTG Retailnek, hogy a felvétel terhesség miatti ilyen megtagadását a törvény tiltja. Mindazonáltal 2015. augusztus 12‑én T. Vandenbon megtudta, hogy a WTG Retail megerősítette J. Hakelbracht felvételének ugyanazon okból való megtagadását.
Ugyanezen a napon T. Vandenbon arról tájékoztatta J. Hakelbrachtot, hogy jelentkezését terhessége miatt nem fogadták el.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"elektronikus levelében 06/07/2015";
  "elektronikus levelében 06/07/2015"->"J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon";
  "elektronikus levelében 06/07/2015"->"hogy J. Hakelbrachtot terhessége miatt nem kívánja alkalmazni.."[dir=none];
  "J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="J. Hakelbracht személyében megfelelő pályázót talált. Hakelbracht"];
  "J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"A felvétel terhesség miatti ilyen megtagadását a törvény tiltja.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit J. Hakelbracht Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"->"J. Hakelbracht Hakelbracht"[lable="Arról tájékoztatta J. Hakelbrachtot, hogy jelentkezését terhessége miatt nem fogadták el.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: Maltese

Fil-5 ta’ Lulju 2015, T. Vandenbon għarrfet lil WTG Retail li kienet sabet kandidata xierqa fil-persuna ta’ J. Hakelbracht. Madankollu, il-kap tar-riżorsi umani ta’ din l-impriża informaha, b’posta elettronika tas-6 ta’ Lulju 2015, li ma riedx jimpjega lil J. Hakelbracht minħabba t-tqala tagħha.
B’ittra elettronika tas-7 ta’ Lulju 2015, T. Vandenbon irrimarkat lil WTG Retail li tali rifjut ta’ reklutaġġ minħabba t-tqala kien ipprojbit mil-liġi. Madankollu, fit-12 ta’ Awwissu 2015, hija saret taf li WTG Retail ikkonfermat ir-rifjut tagħha li tirrekluta lil J. Hakelbracht għall-istess raġuni.
Fl-istess jum, T. Vandenbon informat lil J. Hakelbracht li l-kandidatura tagħha ma ġietx magħżula minħabba t-tqala tagħha.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"posta elettronika 06/07/2015";
  "posta elettronika 06/07/2015"->"T. Vandenbon Vandenbon";
  "posta elettronika 06/07/2015"->"ma riedx jimpjega lil J. Hakelbracht minħabba t-tqala tagħha.."[dir=none];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="T. Vandenbon għarrfet lil WTG Retail li kienet sabet kandidata xierqa fil-persuna ta’ J. Hakelbracht. Hakelbracht"];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"tali rifjut ta’ reklutaġġ minħabba t-tqala kien ipprojbit mil-liġi.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit T. Vandenbon Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"T. Vandenbon Hakelbracht"[lable="T. Vandenbon informat lil J. Hakelbracht li l-kandidatura tagħha ma ġietx magħżula minħabba t-tqala tagħha.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: Dutch

Op 5 juli 2015 stelde Vandenbon WTG Retail ervan in kennis dat zij in de persoon van Hakelbracht een geschikte sollicitante had gevonden. Het hoofd personeelszaken van die onderneming deelde haar bij e‑mail van 6 juli 2015 evenwel mee dat zij Hakelbracht wegens haar zwangerschap niet in dienst wilde nemen.
Bij e‑mail van 7 juli 2015 maakte Vandenbon WTG Retail erop attent dat een dergelijke weigering van indienstneming wegens zwangerschap bij wet was verboden. Op 12 augustus 2015 vernam zij echter dat WTG Retail de weigering om Hakelbracht aan te werven om dezelfde reden bevestigde.
Op dezelfde dag bracht Vandenbon Hakelbracht ervan op de hoogte dat haar sollicitatie vanwege haar zwangerschap niet was aanvaard.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Hakelbracht Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"7 juli 2015 06/07/2015";
  "7 juli 2015 06/07/2015"->"Hakelbracht Vandenbon";
  "7 juli 2015 06/07/2015"->"zij Hakelbracht wegens haar zwangerschap niet in dienst wilde nemen.."[dir=none];
  "Hakelbracht Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="Op 5 juli 2015 stelde Vandenbon WTG Retail ervan in kennis dat zij in de persoon van Hakelbracht een geschikte sollicitante had gevonden. Hakelbracht"];
  "Hakelbracht Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"een dergelijke weigering van indienstneming wegens zwangerschap bij wet was verboden.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"Hakelbracht Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit Hakelbracht Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "Hakelbracht Vandenbon"->"Hakelbracht Hakelbracht"[lable="bracht Vandenbon Hakelbracht ervan op de hoogte dat haar sollicitatie vanwege haar zwangerschap niet was aanvaard.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: Polish

W dniu 5 lipca 2015 r. T. Vandenbon poinformowała WTG Retail, że znalazła odpowiednią kandydatkę w osobie J. Hakelbracht. Jednakże pocztą elektroniczną z dnia 6 lipca 2015 r kierowniczka ds. zasobów ludzkich w tym przedsiębiorstwie powiadomiła T. Vandenbon, że nie chce zatrudnić H. Hakelbracht ze względu na jej ciążę.
Pocztą elektroniczną z dnia 7 lipca 2015 r. T. Vandenbon zwróciła uwagę WTG Retail, że odmowa zatrudnienia w związku z ciążą jest niezgodna z prawem. Niemniej jednak w dniu 12 sierpnia 2015 r. dowiedziała się, że WTG Retail podtrzymało decyzję o odmowie zatrudnienia J. Hakelbracht z tego samego powodu.
Tego samego dnia T. Vandenbon powiadomiła J. Hakelbracht, że w związku z jej ciążą jej kandydatura została rozpatrzona negatywnie.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"7 lipca 2015 r. 06/07/2015";
  "7 lipca 2015 r. 06/07/2015"->"T. Vandenbon Vandenbon";
  "7 lipca 2015 r. 06/07/2015"->"nie chce zatrudnić H. Hakelbracht ze względu na jej ciążę.."[dir=none];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="T. Vandenbon poinformowała WTG Retail, że znalazła odpowiednią kandydatkę w osobie J. Hakelbracht. Hakelbracht"];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"odmowa zatrudnienia w związku z ciążą jest niezgodna z prawem.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit T. Vandenbon Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"T. Vandenbon Hakelbracht"[lable="T. Vandenbon powiadomiła J. Hakelbracht, że w związku z jej ciążą jej kandydatura została rozpatrzona negatywnie.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: Portuguese

Em 5 de julho de 2015, T. Vandenbon informou a WTG Retail de que encontrara uma candidata adequada na pessoa de J. Hakelbracht. Todavia, a responsável pelos recursos humanos dessa empresa deu‑lhe conhecimento, por correio eletrónico de 6 de julho de 2015, de que não pretendia contratar J. Hakelbracht devido à sua gravidez.
Por correio eletrónico de 7 de julho de 2015, T. Vandenbon assinalou à WTG Retail que essa recusa de recrutamento era proibida por lei. Não obstante, em 12 de agosto de 2015, soube que a WTG Retail confirmava a recusa de recrutar J. Hakelbracht pela mesma razão.
No mesmo dia, T. Vandenbon informou J. Hakelbracht de que a sua candidatura não tinha sido aceite devido à sua gravidez.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"correio eletrónico de 06/07/2015";
  "correio eletrónico de 06/07/2015"->"J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon";
  "correio eletrónico de 06/07/2015"->"não pretendia contratar J. Hakelbracht devido à sua gravidez.."[dir=none];
  "J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="informou a WTG Retail de que encontrara uma candidata adequada na pessoa de J. Hakelbracht. Hakelbracht"];
  "J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"essa recusa de recrutamento era proibida por lei.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit J. Hakelbracht Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "J. Hakelbracht Vandenbon"->"J. Hakelbracht Hakelbracht"[lable="informou J. Hakelbracht de que a sua candidatura não tinha sido aceite devido à sua gravidez.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: Romanian

La 5 iulie 2015, doamna Vandenbon a informat WTG Retail că a găsit o candidată corespunzătoare în persoana doamnei Hakelbracht. Cu toate acestea, inspectoarea de resurse umane din această întreprindere i‑a comunicat, prin e‑mailul din 6 iulie 2015, că nu dorea să o angajeze pe doamna Hakelbracht ca urmare a sarcinii sale.
Prin e‑mailul din 7 iulie 2015, doamna Vandenbon a semnalat WTG Retail că un astfel de refuz de angajare determinat de sarcină era interzis de lege. Cu toate acestea, la 12 august 2015, ea a aflat că WTG Retail confirma refuzul recrutării doamnei Hakelbracht pentru același motiv.
În aceeași zi, doamna Vandenbon a informat‑o pe doamna Hakelbracht că nu i‑a fost reținută candidatura ca urmare a sarcinii.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "doamna Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"7 iulie 2015 06/07/2015";
  "7 iulie 2015 06/07/2015"->"doamna Vandenbon";
  "7 iulie 2015 06/07/2015"->"nu dorea să o angajeze pe doamna Hakelbracht ca urmare a sarcinii sale.."[dir=none];
  "doamna Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="doamna Vandenbon a informat WTG Retail că a găsit o candidată corespunzătoare în persoana doamnei Hakelbracht. Hakelbracht"];
  "doamna Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"Un astfel de refuz de angajare determinat de sarcină era interzis de lege.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"doamna Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit doamna Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "doamna Vandenbon"->"doamna Hakelbracht"[lable="doamna Vandenbon a informat‑o pe doamna Hakelbracht că nu i‑a fost reținută candidatura ca urmare a sarcinii.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: Slovak

Dňa 5. júla 2015 pani Vandenbonová informovala WTG Retail, že našla vhodnú kandidátku v osobe pani Hakelbrachtovej. Vedúca oddelenia ľudských zdrojov tejto spoločnosti jej však e‑mailom zo 6. júla 2015 oznámila, že pani Hakelbrachtovú nechce zamestnať z dôvodu jej tehotenstva.
E‑mailom zo 7. júla 2015 pani Vandenbonová oznámila spoločnosti WTG Retail, že takýto dôvod odmietnutia zamestnania z dôvodu tehotenstva je zo zákona zakázaný. Napriek tomu sa 12. augusta 2015 dozvedela, že WTG Retail potvrdila odmietnutie zamestnať pani Hakelbrachtovú z toho istého dôvodu.
V rovnaký deň pani Vandenbonová informovala pani Hakelbrachtovú, že jej žiadosť o zamestnanie bola odmietnutá z dôvodu jej tehotenstva.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "pani Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"7. júla 2015 06/07/2015";
  "7. júla 2015 06/07/2015"->"pani Vandenbon";
  "7. júla 2015 06/07/2015"->"že pani Hakelbrachtovú nechce zamestnať z dôvodu jej tehotenstva.."[dir=none];
  "pani Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="Dňa 5. júla 2015 pani Vandenbonová informovala WTG Retail, že našla vhodnú kandidátku v osobe pani Hakelbrachtovej. Hakelbracht"];
  "pani Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"takýto dôvod odmietnutia zamestnania z dôvodu tehotenstva je zo zákona zakázaný.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"pani Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit pani Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "pani Vandenbon"->"pani Hakelbracht"[lable="pani Vandenbonová informovala pani Hakelbrachtovú, že jej žiadosť o zamestnanie bola odmietnutá z dôvodu jej tehotenstva.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: Slovenian

T. Vandenbon je družbo WTG Retail 5. julija 2015 obvestila, da je J. Hakelbracht primerna kandidatka. Vendar jo je vodja službe za človeške vire te družbe 6. julija 2015 po elektronski pošti obvestil, da J. Hakelbracht zaradi nosečnosti ne želi zaposliti.
T. Vandenbon je družbo WTG Retail 7. julija 2015 po elektronski pošti obvestila, da je takšna zavrnitev zaposlitve zaradi nosečnosti zakonsko prepovedana. Kljub temu je 12. avgusta 2015 izvedela, da je družba WTG Retail iz istega razloga potrdila zavrnitev zaposlitve J. Hakelbracht.
T. Vandenbon je istega dne J. Hakelbracht obvestila, da njena prijava ni bila izbrana zaradi nosečnosti.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"elektronski pošti 06/07/2015";
  "elektronski pošti 06/07/2015"->"T. Vandenbon Vandenbon";
  "elektronski pošti 06/07/2015"->"J. Hakelbracht zaradi nosečnosti ne želi zaposliti.."[dir=none];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="J. Hakelbracht primerna kandidatka. Hakelbracht"];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"takšna zavrnitev zaposlitve zaradi nosečnosti zakonsko prepovedana.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit T. Vandenbon Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "T. Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"T. Vandenbon Hakelbracht"[lable="T. Vandenbon je istega dne J. Hakelbracht obvestila, da njena prijava ni bila izbrana zaradi nosečnosti.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: Finnish

Vandenbon ilmoitti 5.7.2015 WTG Retailille löytäneensä Hakelbrachtista tehtävään soveltuvan hakijan. Kyseisen yrityksen henkilöstöosaston vastaava ilmoitti kuitenkin hänelle sähköpostilla 6.7.2015, ettei Hakelbrachtia haluta ottaa palvelukseen tämän raskauden takia.
Vandenbon ilmoitti 7.7.2015 sähköpostillaan WTG Retailille, että tällainen työhönoton epääminen raskauden vuoksi on laissa kiellettyä. Hän sai kuitenkin 12.8.2015 tietää, että WTG Retail vahvisti kieltäytymisensä ottaa Hakelbracht palvelukseensa samasta syystä.
Samana päivänä Vandenbon ilmoitti Hakelbrachtille, ettei hänen hakemustaan ollut hyväksytty raskauden vuoksi.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Vandenbon Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"sähköpostilla 06/07/2015";
  "sähköpostilla 06/07/2015"->"Vandenbon Vandenbon";
  "sähköpostilla 06/07/2015"->"ettei Hakelbrachtia haluta ottaa palvelukseen tämän raskauden takia.."[dir=none];
  "Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="Vandenbon ilmoitti 5.7.2015 WTG Retailille löytäneensä Hakelbrachtista tehtävään soveltuvan hakijan. Hakelbracht"];
  "Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"Tällainen työhönoton epääminen raskauden vuoksi on laissa kiellettyä.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"Vandenbon Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit Vandenbon Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"Vandenbon Hakelbracht"[lable="Vandenbon ilmoitti Hakelbrachtille, ettei hänen hakemustaan ollut hyväksytty raskauden vuoksi.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: Swedish

Den 5 juli 2015 informerade Tine Vandenbon WTG Retail om att hon hade hittat en lämplig kandidat i Jamina Hakelbracht. Företagets personalchef meddelade dock, i e-postmeddelande av den 6 juli 2015, att hon inte önskade anställa Jamina Hakelbracht på grund av att hon var gravid.
I e-postmeddelande av den 7 juli 2015 påpekade Tine Vandenbon för WTG Retail att det var förbjudet enligt lag att neka någon anställning på grund av graviditet. Den 12 augusti 2015 erfor hon emellertid att WTG Retail bekräftade sitt beslut att inte anställa Jamina Hakelbracht av samma skäl.
Tine Vandenbon informerade samma dag Jamina Hakelbracht om att hennes ansökan inte haft framgång på grund av hennes graviditet.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Tine Vandenbon Vandenbon"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "WTG Retail"->"e-postmeddelande av 06/07/2015";
  "e-postmeddelande av 06/07/2015"->"Tine Vandenbon Vandenbon";
  "e-postmeddelande av 06/07/2015"->"hon inte önskade anställa Jamina Hakelbracht på grund av att hon var gravid.."[dir=none];
  "Tine Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"WTG Retail"[label="Jamina Hakelbracht Hakelbracht"];
  "Tine Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"Email 05/07/2015";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"WTG Retail";
  "Email 05/07/2015"->"det var förbjudet enligt lag att neka någon anställning på grund av graviditet.."[dir=none];
  "WTG Retail"->"Tine Vandenbon Vandenbon"[label="Refusal to recruit Tine Vandenbon Hakelbracht for pregnancy 12/08/2015"];
  "Tine Vandenbon Vandenbon"->"Tine Vandenbon Hakelbracht"[lable="Tine Vandenbon informerade samma dag Jamina Hakelbracht om att hennes ansökan inte haft framgång på grund av hennes graviditet.."];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 June 2019.
Jamina Hakelbracht and Others v WTG Retail BVBA.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Antwerpen.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employment and working conditions — Article 24 — Protection against retaliatory measures — Rejection of a candidate due to her pregnancy — Employee intervening in favour of that candidate — Dismissal of that employee.
Case C-404/18. (2019)
Language: English

Ms Hakelbracht then contacted WTG Retail about her failure to be hired, stating that she was considering lodging a complaint against the company with the Institute. As WTG Retail did not subsequently change its position, Ms Hakelbracht lodged such a complaint and informed the company thereof on 26 September 2015.
On 5 October 2015, Ms Vandenbon had a meeting with the head of WTG Retail concerning Ms Hakelbracht’s failure to be hired, in which Ms Vandenbon was blamed for being the cause of the complaint lodged by Ms Hakelbracht.
On 12 November 2015, the Institute informed WTG Retail of the receipt of Ms Hakelbracht’s complaint. By email sent to the Institute on 11 December 2015, WTG Retail formally challenged that it refused to hire Ms Hakelbracht because of her pregnancy.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
   "WTG Retail"[shape=doubleoctagon];
   "Ms Hakelbracht"[shape=doubleoctagon];
   "Institute"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
   "Ms Hakelbracht"->"WTG Retail"[label="Informed the company 26/09/2015"];
   "Ms Hakelbracht"->"Institute"[label="Lodging a complaint against the company"];
   "Institute"->"WTG Retail"[label="Notify that it formally challenged that it refused to hire Ms Hakelbracht because of her pregnancy."];
   "WTG Retail"->"Email 11/12/2015";
   "Email 11/12/2015"->"Institute";
   "Email 11/12/2015"->"Formally challenged that it refused to hire Ms Hakelbracht because of her pregnancy."[dir=none];
    
}