EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-547/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Innsbruck (Austria) lodged on 28 December 2009 — Pensionsversicherungsanstalt v Andrea Schwab

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62009CN0547

62009CN0547

December 28, 2009
With Google you find a lot.
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

17.4.2010

Official Journal of the European Union

C 100/14

(Case C-547/09)

2010/C 100/22

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Pensionsversicherungsanstalt

Respondent: Andrea Schwab

Questions referred

1.Should Article 2(2), first indent, and Article 3(1)(c) of Directive 76/207/EEC, as amended by Directive 2002/73/EC, and Article 2(1)(a) and (b) and Article 14(1)(c) of Directive 2006/54/EC be interpreted as meaning that direct sex discrimination (termination/dismissal of an employed doctor) by a public pension insurance fund may be justified?

2.Should Article 4(1) of Directive 97/80/EEC and Article 19(1) of Directive 2006/54/EC — and possibly Article 2(2), second indent, of Directive 76/207/EEC, as amended by Directive 2002/73/EC, and Article 2(1)(b) of Directive 2006/54/EC or Article 2(2)(a) in conjunction with Article 6(1) of Directive 2000/78/EC — be interpreted as precluding national legislation which, in the event of actions for the annulment of terminations/dismissals inter alia on the grounds of sex, does not permit the consideration of social factors or interests, but only the assessment of evidence as to whether the sex discrimination was the predominant motive for the termination/dismissal or whether another reason to be substantiated by the employer predominated?

Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions; OJ 1976 L, p. 40.

Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation (recast); OJ 2006 L 204, p. 23.

Council Directive 97/80/EC of 15 December 1997 on the burden of proof in cases of discrimination based on sex; OJ 1998 L 14, p. 6.

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.

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia