- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-585/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul București (Romania) lodged on 2 August 2019 — Academia de Studii Economice din București v Organismul Intermediar pentru Programul Operațional Capital Uman — Ministerul Educației Naționale
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019CN0585
62019CN0585
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
Official Journal of the European Union
C 406/8
(Case C-585/19)
(2019/C 406/13)
Language of the case: Romanian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Academia de Studii Economice din București
Defendant: Organismul Intermediar pentru Programul Operațional Capital Uman — Ministerul Educației Naționale
Questions referred
1.Should ‘working time’, as defined in Article 2(1) of Directive 2003/88/EC, be understood as meaning ‘any period during which the worker is working, at the employer’s disposal and carrying out his activity or duties’ under a single (full-time) contract or under all (employment) contracts concluded by that worker?
2.Should the requirements imposed on Member States by Article 3 of Directive 2003/88/EC (obligation to take the measures necessary to ensure that each worker enjoys at least 11 consecutive hours’ rest per 24-hour period) and by Article 6(b) of that directive (establishing a maximum weekly working time limit of 48 hours, on average, including overtime) be interpreted as introducing limits with regard to one single contract or with regard to all the contracts concluded with the same employer or with different employers?
3.In the event that the answers to Questions 1 and 2 involve an interpretation which is such as to exclude the possibility of the Member States being able to regulate, at national level, the application per contract of Article 3 and Article 6(b) of Directive 2003/88/EC, where there are no provisions of national legislation governing the fact that the minimum daily rest and the maximum weekly working time are to relate to the worker (regardless of how many employment contracts are concluded with the same employer or with different employers), is a public institution of a Member State, which acts on behalf of the State, in a position to rely on the direct application of Article 3 and Article 6(b) of Directive 2003/88/EC and to penalise the employer for failure to observe the limits laid down by that directive as regards daily rest and/or the maximum weekly working time?
Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time (OJ 2003 L 299, p. 9).