- 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-18/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 16 January 2017 — Danieli & C. Officine Meccaniche SpA and Others v Arbeitsmarktservice Leoben
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62017CN0018
62017CN0018
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 144/18
(Case C-18/17)
(2017/C 144/24)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: Danieli & C. Officine Meccaniche SpA, Dragan Panic, Ivan Arnautov, Jakov Mandic, Miroslav Brnjac, Nikolai Dorassevitch, Alen Mihovic
Defendant: Arbeitsmarktservice Leoben
Questions referred
1.Are Articles 56 and 57 TFEU, Directive 96/71/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services, Paragraph 2 and Paragraph 12 of Chapter 2, Free movement of persons, of Annex V to the Act concerning the conditions of accession of the Republic of Croatia and the adjustments to the Treaty on European Union, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, to be interpreted as meaning that Austria is entitled to restrict the posting of workers employed in an undertaking established in Croatia by requiring a work permit, where this posting takes place by means of transfer to a company established in Italy so that the Italian company can provide a service in Austria, and the work carried out by the Croatian workers for the Italian company on the construction of a wire rod mill in Austria is restricted to providing this service in Austria and there is no employment relationship between them and the Italian company?
2.Are Articles 56 and 57 TFEU and Directive 96/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services to be interpreted as meaning that Austria is entitled to restrict the posting of Russian and Belarusian workers employed in a company established in Italy by requiring a work permit, if this posting takes place by means of transfer to a second company established in Italy for the purpose of the provision by the second company of a service in Austria, and the work of the Russian and/or Belarusian workers for the second company is restricted to providing its service in Austria and there is no employment relationship between them and the second company?
Language of the case: German.
(1) OJ L 18, 21.1.1997, p. 1.
* * *