natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Domstolen udtalte, at fællesskabslovgiver ved at harmonisere de regler, der gælder for varetagelse af arbejdstagernes rettigheder i forbindelse med
The intention of the Community legislature was not therefore to allow the different national legal systems to accept a situation in which no employee representatives are designated since such designation is necessary to ensure compliance with the obligations laid down in Article 6 of the directive.
Som anført ovenfor fastsætter direktivets artikel 6, stk. 1 og 2, en forpligtelse til at informere og konsultere arbejdstagerrepræsentanterne i forbindelse med overførsel af virksomheder.
To that end, paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 6 of the directive lay down the principle of compulsory information and, where appropriate, consultation of employee representatives by both the transferor and the transferee, subject to the exceptions provided for in particular by Article 6(4).
Bestemmelsens stk. 3 og 4 opregner de tilfælde, hvor medlemsstaterne på visse betingelser kan begrænse denne forpligtelse.
Article 2(c) is not simply a renvoi to the rules in force in the Member States on the designation of employee representatives. It leaves to Member
Navnlig kan medlemsstaterne efter stk. 4 fritage virksomheder eller bedrifter, som for så vidt angår antallet af arbejdstagere ikke opfylder betingelserne forvalg
While it is true that the directive does not contain any provision designed expressly to deal with such a case, that has no bearing on the combined effect of Articles 6 and 8 of the directive, which require Member States to take
mulighed for at gøre indgreb i den beskyttelse, direktivets artikel 6 har indført til fordel for arbejdstagerne, må anses for at være i modstrid med bestemmelserne i direktivets artikel 6.
all measures necessary to ensure that employees are informed and consulted through their representatives in the event of the transfer of an undertaking.
Der måtte derfor gives Kommissionen medhold i dens første klagepunkt.
The Commission does not cite any judicial decision which is later than that judgment and incompatible with Article 1(1) of the directive, as interpreted by the Court.
eller udpegelse af en kollegial instans, der repræsenterer arbejdstagerne, for denne forpligtelse.
However, the limited character of such harmonization cannot deprive the provisions of the directive, and especially Article 6, of their effectiveness.
For at undgå, at arbejdstagerne står helt uden beskyttelse, kan medlemsstaterne i så fald efter direktivets artikel 6, stk. 5, træffe bestemmelse om, at arbejdstagerne ikke desto mindre skal underrettes om en nært forestående overførsel.
In particular, it cannot prevent Member States from being required to take all appropriate measures to ensure that employee representatives are designated with a view to the provision of information and consultations provided for by Article 6.
Det andet klagepunkt
second complaint was
Selv om direktivet ikke indeholder nogen bestemmelse, der udtrykkelig skal regulere et sådant tilfælde, berører dette ikke bestemmelserne i direktivets artikel 6 sammenholdt med artikel 8, som pålægger medlemsstaterne at træffe alle de foranstaltninger, der er nødvendige for, al arbejdstagerne i forbindelse med overførsel af virksomheder informeres og konsulteres via deres repræsentanter.
The United Kingdom itself recognized that, as United Kingdom law now stands, employees affected by the transfer of an undertaking do not enjoy protection under Article 6 of the directive in cases where an employer objects to employee representation in his undertaking.
Det Forenede Kongerige gjorde gældende, at eftersom the Regulations ifølge House of Lords' praksis skal fortolkes i lyset af direktivet og Domstolens fortolkning af det, er deres anvendelsesområde identisk med direktivets, selv om det ikke udtrykkeligt angives i the Regulations, at en overførsel i deres forstand ikke nødvendigvis indebærer en overdragelse af ejendomsretten til virksomheden.
The Commission argued in its third complaint that the UK Regulations, as interpreted by courts and tribunals in the United Kingdom, do not apply to non-profit-making undertakings, contrary to Article 1(1) of the directive, as interpreted by the Court.
Direktivet sikrer ganske vist kun en delvis harmonisering af reglerne om bcskyltclsc af arbejdstagerne i tilfælde af ny indehaver. Der tilsigtes derfor ikke med direktivet en harmonisering afalle de nationale ordninger med hensyn til arbejdstagerrcpræsentation i virksomheden. Imidlertid kan en sådan begrænset harmonisering ikke fratage bestemmelserne i direktivet, herunder i artikel 6, deres effektive virkning.
In those circumstances, United Kingdom law, which allows an employer to frustrate the protection provided for employees by Article 6 of the directive, was to be regarded as contrary to Article 6 thereof.
Domstolen udtalte, at rækkevidden af nationale administrativt eller ved lov fastsatte bestemmelser skal bedømmes under hensyntagen til de nationale domstoles fortolkning af dem.
The Court had already accepted, at least implicitly, in the context of competition law or social law, that a body might be engaged in economic activities and be regarded as an 'undertaking' for the purposes of Community law even though it did not operate with a view to profit.
Desuden bemærkede Domstolen, at de britiske retsafgørelser, Kommissionen har påberåbt sig til støtte for sit andet klagepunkt, er truffet før House of Lords' dom, som Det Forenede Kongerige henviser til, og som er afsagt den 16. marts 1989.
In its second complaint, the Commission argued that the Regulations, as interpreted by courts and tribunals in the United Kingdom, do not apply to transfers which do not involve the transfer of the property of an undertaking, contrary to Article 1(1) of the directive, as interpreted by the Court.
Af denne dom fremgår det - som Kommissionen har erkendt - at the Regulations, så vidt det overhovedet er muligt, skal fortolkes i overensstemmelse med direktivets ordlyd og formål samt Domstolens fortolkning af det.
It followed that by restricting the application of the national rules transposing the directive to transfers of profit-making undertakings, the United Kingdom had failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 1(1) of the directive.
Kommissionen har ikke henvist til retsafgørelser, der er truffet efter denne dom, og som er i modstrid med bestemmelserne i direktivets artikel 1, stk. 1, som fortolket af Domstolen.
The Commission's third complaint was therefore well founded.
Der kunne følgelig ikke gives Kommissionen medhold i det andet klagepunkt.
The fourth complaint
Det Forenede Kongerige har selv indrømmet, al de arbejdstagere, der berøres af en overførsel af en virksomhed, på britisk rets nuværende udviklingstrin ikke nyder godt af beskyttelsen efter direktivets artikel 6, når arbejdsgiveren modsætter sig arbejdstagerrcpræsentation i sin virksomhed.
The United Kingdom submitted that since, according to the case-law of the House of Lords, the UK Regulations must be interpreted in accordance with the directive and the Court's interpretation of it, their scope is the same as that of the directive, even if the Regulations do not expressly state that a transfer thereunder
Under disse omstændigheder fandt Domstolen, at den britiske lovgivning, som giver en arbejdsgiver
The Commission submitted that the Regulations fail to transpose Article 6 of the directive fully, since they merely require a transferor or
Med det tredje klagepunkt gjorde Kommissionen gældende, at the Regulations, således som de fortolkes af de britiske domstole, ikke finder anvendelse på ikkc-erhvervsdrivende virksomheder, hvilket er i modstrid med bestemmelserne i direktivets artikel 1, stk. 1, således som de fortolkes af Domstolen.
transferee envisaging measures in relation to employees affected by a transfer to consult the representatives of trade unions recognized by him, to take into consideration any representations made by them, to reply to those representations and, if he rejects them, to provide reasons, whereas Article 6(2) of the directive imposes an obligation to consult representatives of the employees *with a view to seeking agreement'.
Der målte derfor gives Kommissionen medhold i dens tredje klagepunkt.
The Commission's therefore upheld.
Det fjerde klagepunkt
The fifth complaint
Domstolen udtalte, at når et fællesskabsdirektiv ikke fastsætter en særlig sanktion for overtrædelser eller med hensyn hertil henviser til nationale administrativt eller ved lov fastsatte bestemmelser, skal medlemsstaterne i medfør af traktatens artikel 5 træffe alle foranstaltninger, som er egnede til at sikre fællesskabsrettens gennemslagskraft.
Under the UK Regulations, an employer who rails to consult employee representatives at the time of the transfer of an undertaking may be ordered to pay appropriate compensation to employees affected by the transfer. The amount of compensation may not exceed a maximum amount which was increased from two weeks' pay for the employee in question to four weeks' pay by the Trade Union Reform and Employment Rights Act 1993.
Medlemsstaterne har et skøn med hensyn til valget af sanktioner, men skal dog drage omsorg for, at overtrædelser af fællesskabsretten sanktioneres efter samme materielle og processuelle regler, som efter national ret gælder for overtrædelser af samme art og grovhed, og sanktionen skal under alle omstændigheder være effektiv, stå i rimeligt forhold til overtrædelsen og have en afskrækkende virkning.
However, where an employer also dismisses employees on grounds of redundancy and rails to consult employee representatives, contrary to the EPA, any compensation may be set off against a 'protective award' which the employer may later be ordered to make to the employee under the EPA and, conversely, a 'protective award' may be set off against any compensation which the employer may subsequently be ordered to pay to the employee.
Kommissionen gjorde gældende, at the Regulations' gennemførelse af bestemmelserne i direktivets artikel 6 er ufuldstændig, idet den overdrager eller erhverver, som overvejer at træffe foranstaltninger for de arbejdstagere, der berøres af en overførsel, efter the Regulations kun er forpligtet til at indlede konsultationer med repræsentanterne for de af dem anerkendte fagforeninger, at tage hensyn lii alle de bemærkninger, der fremsætles af disse repræsentanter, at svare på disse bemærkninger og, hvis de ser bort fra dem, at angive grunden hertil, hvorimod arbejdstagerrepræsentanterne efter direktivets artikel 6, stk. 2, skal konsulteres »med henblik på at opnå en aftale«.
The Commission submitted that the sanctions for failure on the part of a transferor or transferee to comply with their obligation to consult and inform employee representatives are not a sufficient deterrent for employers. It pointed out that any compensation which an employer may, in appropriate cases, be ordered to pay to employees under Regulation 11, which is in any event limited to a maximum amount, may be set off against a 'protective award' which the employer may also be ordered to make to employees if he fails to comply with the Employment Protection Act 1975 ('the EPA'), which requires the employer to inform and consult employee representatives in the event of redundancies.
Det Forenede Kongerige medgav, at deis lovgivning ikke er i overensstemmelse med direktivet på dette punkt.
The financial penalty is accordingly weakened, if not entirely removed.
Der målte derfor gives Kommissionen medhold i det fjerde klagepunkt.
It followed that if an employer is also found to be at fault on the basis of the EPA, the penalty is not truly deterrent.
Det femte klagepunkt
The Commission's fifth complaint was therefore upheld.
I medfør af de britiske regler kan den arbejdsgiver, som undlader at konsultere arbejdstagerrepræsentanterne i forbindelse med overførsel af en virksomhed, tilpligtes at betale de arbejdstagere, der berøres af overførslen, en passende godtgørelse. Godtgørelsen kan ikke ligge over et loft, som ved Trade Union Reform and Employment Rights Act 1993 er hævet fra to til fire ugers løn for den pågældende arbejdstager.
The Court held that, where a Community directive does not specifically provide any penalty for an infringement or refers for that purpose to national laws, regulations and administrative provisions, Article 5 of the Treaty requires the Member States to take all measures necessary to guarantee the application and effectiveness of Community law.
Når arbejdsgiveren desuden afskediger arbejdstagere af økonomiske årsager, og han i modstrid med EPA undlader at konsultere arbejdstagerrepræsentanterne, skal godtgørelsen imidlertid trækkes fra det beløb, som arbejdsgiveren senere ved en såkaldt »protective award« kan blive tilpligtet at betale til arbejdstageren i henhold til EPA og omvendt skal dette beløb trækkes fra den godtgørelse,
For that purpose, while the choice of penalties remains within their discretion, they must ensure in particular that infringements of Community law are penalized under conditions, both procedural and substantive, which are analogous to those applicable to infringements of national law of a similar nature and importance and which, in any event, make the penalty effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
Det Forenede Kongerige har tilsidesat de forpligtelser, der påhviler det i medfør af direktivet og EØF-traktalens artikel 5, idel det ikke har fastsat bestemmelser om udpegelse af arbejdslagenepræsenlanler, når der ikke opnås samtykke hertil fra arbejdsgiveren, har udelukket ikke-erhvervsdrivende virksomheder fra anvendelsesområdet for de Regulations, som skulle gennemføre Rådets direktiv 77/187/EØF af 14. februar 1977 om tilnærmelse af medlemsstaternes lovgivning om varetagelse af arbejdslagerne rettigheder i forbindelse med overførsel af virksomheder, bedrifler eller dele af hedrifler, ikke har forpligtet den overdrager eller erhverver, der overvejer foranstaltninger for sine arbejdslagere, til i rimelig tid at indlede konsultationer om disse foranstaltninger med arbejdstagerrepræsentanterne med henblik på at opnå en aftale og ikke har fasisat effektive sanktioner for det tilfælde, at arbejdsgiveren undlader at informere og konsultere arbejdstagerrepræsentanterne.
Declares that, by failing to provide for the designation of ' employee representatives where an employer does not agree to it, by excluding non-profit-making undertakings from the scope of Ike United Kingdom Regulations designed to implement Council Directive 77/187/EEC of 14 February 1977 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts ofbusinesses, by not requiring a transferor or transferee who envisages measures in relation to hú employees to consuti their representatives in good time on such measures with a view to seeking agreement, and by failing to provide for effective sanctions in the event of the employer's failure to inform and consult employee représentatives, the United Kingdom has failed to fulfil its obligations under the directive and under Article S of the EEC Treaty;
1 øvrigt frifindes Del Forenede Kongerige.
Dismisses the remainder of the application;
Det Forenede Kongerige betaler sagens omkostninger. «
Orders the United Kingdom to pay the costs."
Generaladvokat W. Van Gerven fremsatte forslap til afgørelse i retsmødet (Domstolens plenuml den 2. marts 1994.
Advocate General Van Gerven delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Full Court on 2 March 1994.
Hans forslag til afgørelse lød således:
He proposed that the Court should declare that:
»Det Forenede Kongerige Storbritannien og Nordirland har tilsidesat de forpligtelser, der påhviler det i medfør af EØF-traktatens artikel 5 og Rådets direktiv 77/187/EØF af 14. februar 1977 om tilnærmelse af medlemsstaternes lovgivning om varetagelse af arbejdstagerne rettigheder i forbindelse med overførsel af virksomheder, bedrifter eller dele af bedrifter:
'the United Kingdom has failed on the following grounds to fulfil its obligations under Article 5 of the EC Treaty and Council Directive 77/187/EEC of 14 February 1977 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of businesses: its failure to provide measures enabling workers' representatives to be designated with a view to the application of the directive in cases where an employer is not prepared voluntarily to recognize such representatives (first complaint); its exclusion of certain undertakings from the scope of the directive (third complaint); its failure to require a transferor or a transferee who envisages measures in relation to his employees and is under an obligation to consult the representatives of his employees to do so with a view to seeking agreement (fourth complaint); and its failure to provide for sufficiently effective and deterrent sanctions in the case of failure by an employer to inform and consult workers' representatives as required by the directive (fifth complaint).
Jeg skal foreslå Domstolen i øvrigt at frifinde Det Forenede Kongerige og bestemme, at hver part skal bære sine omkostninger, jf. procesreglementets artikel 69, stk. 3.«
Article l(l)(b) of the directive provides that the term "workers' representatives" means the workers' representatives provided for by the laws or practices of the Member States'.
Sag C-383/92 Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber / Det Forenede Kongerige Storbritannien og Nordirland Socialpolitik
By application lodged at the Court Registry on 21 October 1992, the Commission of the European Communities brought proceedings for a declaration that, by railing to transpose correctly into national law various provisions of Council Directive 75/129/EEC, the United Kingdom had railed to fulfil its obligations under the EEC Treaty.
»Kollektive afskedigelser« (Domstolens plenum)
The directive applies to 'dismissals effected by an employer for one or more reasons not related to the individual workers concerned' where the number of redundancies reflects the criterion chosen by the Member State from the two set out in the directive.
Direktivets bestemmelser blev gennemført i Det Forenede Kongerige ved visse bestemmelser i Employment Protection Act 1975 (herefter benævnt »EPA«).
The directive was transposed in the United Kingdom by some of the provisions of the Employment Protection Act 1975 ('the EPA*).
Det første klagepunkt
The first complaint
Kommissionens første klagepunkt vedrørte gennemførelsen af direktivets artikel 2 og 3 i britisk ret.
The employer is required to supply the workers' representatives with all relevant information and must in any event give in writing the reasons for the redundancies, the number of workers to be made redundant, the number of workers normally employed and the period over which the redundancies are to be effected.
Direktivet finder anvendelse på »afskedigelser, som foretages af en arbejdsgiver af en eller flere grunde, som ikke kan tilregnes arbejdstageren selv, når antallet af afskedigelser« opfylder del af de to i direktivet fastsatte kriterier, som medlemsstaten har valgt.
Such notification must contain all relevant information concerning the projected collective redundancies, the consultations with workers' representatives and the matters specified in Article 2 of the directive. A copy of this notification must be forwarded to the workers' representatives, who
Direktivets artikel 2 bestemmer, at arbejdsgiveren, når han påtænker at foretage kollektive afskedigelser, er forpligtet til at indlede forhandlinger med arbejdstagernes repræsentanter med henblik på at nå frem til en
Article l(l)(b) is not simply a renvoi to the rules in force in the Member States on the designation of workers' representatives. It leaves to Member States only the task of determining the arrangements for designating the workers' representatives who, depending on the
aftale.
directive.
Forhandlingerne skal i det mindste dække mulighederne for at undgå eller begrænse de kollektive afskedigelser, samt mulighederne forai afbøde følgerne af disse. Arbejdsgiveren er forpligtet til at give arbejdstagerrepræsentanterne alle relevante oplysninger og i hvert fald til at give skriftlig meddelelse om årsagerne til afskedigelserne, antallet af arbejdstagere, der skal afskediges, antallet af arbejdslagere, der normali beskæftiges, samt for hvilken periode det forudses at afskedigelserne skal finde sled.
It argues that the EPA applies only to cases of 'redundancy', that is to say, according to the interpretation of that term by the courts and tribunals of the United Kingdom, to cases where there is a cessation or reduction of the business of an undertaking or a decline in demand for work of a particular type, whereas the directive, according to Article l(l)(a), applies to 'collective redundancies', that is to say, dismissals for one or more reasons not related to the individual workers concerned, which covers cases other than 'redundancy1.
Med henblik herpå opstilles der i direktivet et princip om, at arbejdstagerrepræsentanterne skal informeres, og at der skal føres forhandlinger med dem om enkelthederne i forbindelse med de påtænkte kollektive afskedigelser og om muligheden for at begrænse antallet af afskedigelser eller følgerne heraf, og at arbejdstagerrepræsentanterne skal kunne fremsætte bemærkninger over for den kompetente offentlige myndighed.
In its reply to the Commission's letter of formal notice, the United Kingdom conceded that United Kingdom law failed to give full effect to the directive on this point.
Efter direktivets artikel 3 er arbejdsgiveren forpligtet til skriftligt at meddele den kompetente offentlige myndighed enhver plan om kollektive afskedigelser.
The interpretation proposed by the United Kingdom would allow Member States to determine the cases in which workers' representatives may be informed and consulted and may intervene, since they can be informed and consulted and can intervene with public authorities only in undertakings where national law provides for the designation of workers' representatives.
Meddelelsen skal indeholde alle relevante oplysninger om den planlagte kollektive afskedigclse.forhandlingcrnc med arbejdstagernes repræsentanter og de i direktivets artikel 2 nævnte spørgsmål.
Such an interpretation would thus permit Member States to deprive Articles 2 and 3(2) of the directive of their full effect.
En genpart af meddelelsen sendes til arbejdstagerrepræsentanterne, som kan fremsende deres eventuelle bemærkninger til den kompetente offentlige myndighed.
The Court has already held that national legislation which makes it possible to impede protection unconditionally guaranteed to workers by a directive is contrary to Community law.
Direktivets artikel 1, stk. 1, litra b), henviser ikke uforbeholdent til de gældende regler i medlemsstaterne om udpegelse af arbejdstagerrepræsentanter.
The Court acknowledged that the directive carries out only a partial harmonization of the rules for the protection of workers in the event of collective redundancies and is for that reason not designed to bring about full harmonization of national systems of worker representation in undertakings.
Bestemmelsen overlader det udelukkende til medlemsstaterne at afgøre, efter hvilke regler de arbejdstagerrepræsentanter, som i medfør af direktivets artikel 2 og artikel 3, stk. 2, henholdsvis skal eller kan deltage i proceduren ved kollektive afskedigelser, skal udpeges.
However, the limited character of such harmonization cannot deprive the provisions of the directive, and especially Articles 2 and 3, of their effectiveness. In particular, it cannot prevent Member States from being required to take all appropriate measures to ensure that workers' representatives are designated with a view to complying with the obligations laid down in Articles 2 and 3.