- 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-107/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Obvodní soud pro Prahu 9 (Czech Republic) lodged on 12 February 2019 — XR v Dopravní podnik hl. m. Prahy, akciová společnost
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019CN0107
62019CN0107
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
8.4.2019
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 131/28
(Case C-107/19)
(2019/C 131/34)
Language of the case: Czech
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: XR
Defendant: Dopravní podnik hl. m. Prahy, akciová společnost
Questions referred
1.Is a break period in which an employee must be available to his employer within two minutes, in case there is an emergency call out, to be considered ‘working time’ within the meaning of Article 2 of Directive 2003/88/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time?
2.Is the assessment to be made in relation to the question above influenced by the fact that such interruption [of the break] in the event of an emergency call out occurs only at random and unpredictably or, as the case may be, by how often such interruption occurs?
3.Can a court of first instance, ruling after its decision has been set aside by a higher court and the case referred back to it for further proceedings, fail to comply with a legal opinion pronounced by the higher court and which is binding on the court of first instance, if that opinion conflicts with EU law ?
(1) OJ 2003 L 299, p. 9.