This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62008CA0044
Case C-44/08: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 10 September 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus (Finland)) — Akavan Erityisalojen Keskusliitto AEK ry and Others v Fujitsu Siemens Computers Oy (Preliminary ruling procedure — Directive 98/59/EC — Approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies — Article 2 — Protection of workers — Informing and consulting with workers — Group of undertakings — Parent company — Subsidiary)
Case C-44/08: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 10 September 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus (Finland)) — Akavan Erityisalojen Keskusliitto AEK ry and Others v Fujitsu Siemens Computers Oy (Preliminary ruling procedure — Directive 98/59/EC — Approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies — Article 2 — Protection of workers — Informing and consulting with workers — Group of undertakings — Parent company — Subsidiary)
Case C-44/08: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 10 September 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus (Finland)) — Akavan Erityisalojen Keskusliitto AEK ry and Others v Fujitsu Siemens Computers Oy (Preliminary ruling procedure — Directive 98/59/EC — Approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies — Article 2 — Protection of workers — Informing and consulting with workers — Group of undertakings — Parent company — Subsidiary)
OJ C 267, 7.11.2009, p. 15–16
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
7.11.2009 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 267/15 |
Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 10 September 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus (Finland)) — Akavan Erityisalojen Keskusliitto AEK ry and Others v Fujitsu Siemens Computers Oy
(Case C-44/08) (1)
(Preliminary ruling procedure - Directive 98/59/EC - Approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies - Article 2 - Protection of workers - Informing and consulting with workers - Group of undertakings - Parent company - Subsidiary)
2009/C 267/26
Language of the case: Finnish
Referring court
Korkein oikeus
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Akavan Erityisalojen Keskusliitto AEK ry and Others
Defendant: Fujitsu Siemens Computers Oy
Re:
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Korkein oikeus — Interpretation of Articles 2, 3 and 4 of Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies (OJ 1998 L 225, p. 16) — Determination of the time when an obligation arises on the part of a subsidiary to begin consultations with the representatives of its staff — Plans or decisions adopted within a group of undertakings concerning a change in the activities of one of the subsidiaries of that group
Operative part of the judgment
|
1. |
Article 2(1) of Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies must be interpreted to mean that the adoption, within a group of undertakings, of strategic decisions or of changes in activities which compel the employer to contemplate or to plan for collective redundancies gives rise to an obligation on that employer to hold consultations with workers’ representatives. |
|
2. |
Whether the obligation has arisen for the employer to start consultations on the collective redundancies contemplated does not depend on whether the employer is already able to supply to the workers’ representatives all the information required in Article 2(3)(b) of Directive 98/59. |
|
3. |
Article 2(1) of Directive 98/59, read in conjunction with the first subparagraph of Article 2(4) of that directive, must be interpreted to mean that, in the case of a group of undertakings consisting of a parent company and one or more subsidiaries, the obligation to hold consultations with the workers’ representatives falls on the subsidiary which has the status of employer only once that subsidiary, within which collective redundancies may be made, has been identified. |
|
4. |
Article 2(1) of Directive 98/59, read in conjunction with Article 2(4) of that directive, must be interpreted to mean that, in the case of a group of undertakings, the consultation procedure must be concluded by the subsidiary affected by the collective redundancies before that subsidiary, on the direct instructions of its parent company or otherwise, terminates the contracts of employees who are to be affected by those redundancies. |