- 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-246/09: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 8 July 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landesarbeitsgericht Hamburg (Germany)) — Susanne Bulicke v Deutsche Büro Service GmbH (Directive 2000/78/EC — Articles 8 and 9 — National procedure for the enforcement of obligations under the Directive — Period within which a claim must be lodged — Principles of equivalence and effectiveness — Principle of non-reduction of an earlier level of protection)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62009CA0246
62009CA0246
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
28.8.2010
Official Journal of the European Union
C 234/13
(Case C-246/09) (<span class="super">1</span>)
(Directive 2000/78/EC - Articles 8 and 9 - National procedure for the enforcement of obligations under the Directive - Period within which a claim must be lodged - Principles of equivalence and effectiveness - Principle of non-reduction of an earlier level of protection)
2010/C 234/19
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Susanne Bulicke
Defendant: Deutsche Büro Service GmbH
Re:
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Landesarbeitsgericht Hamburg — Interpretation of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16) and of general principles of Community law — Prohibition of discrimination on the basis of the age at the time of hiring — National legislation laying down a time-limit of two months from receipt of the rejection of the job application, or knowledge of the discrimination, within which to bring an action seeking damages and/or compensation
Operative part of the judgment
—firstly, that that time-limit is not less favourable than that applicable to similar domestic actions in employment law,
—secondly, that the fixing of the point from which that time-limit starts to run does not render practically impossible or excessively difficult the exercise of rights conferred by the Directive.
It is for the national court to ascertain whether those two conditions are met.
(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 244, 10.10.2009.