- 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-710/21, IEF Service: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 16 February 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof — Austria) — IEF Service GmbH v HB (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer — Directive 2008/94/EC — Article 9(1) — Undertaking that has its registered office in one Member State and offers its services in another Member State — Worker whose place of residence is in that other Member State — Work performed in the Member State in which the worker’s employer has its registered office and, one week out of two, in the Member State in which the worker resides — Determining which Member State’s guarantee institution is responsible for meeting outstanding wage claims)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021CA0710
62021CA0710
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
11.4.2023
Official Journal of the European Union
C 127/13
(Case C-710/21, (1) IEF Service)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer - Directive 2008/94/EC - Article 9(1) - Undertaking that has its registered office in one Member State and offers its services in another Member State - Worker whose place of residence is in that other Member State - Work performed in the Member State in which the worker’s employer has its registered office and, one week out of two, in the Member State in which the worker resides - Determining which Member State’s guarantee institution is responsible for meeting outstanding wage claims)
(2023/C 127/14)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: IEF Service GmbH
Defendant: HB
Operative part of the judgment
Article 9(1) of Directive 2008/94/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 on the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer
must be interpreted as meaning that in order to determine which Member State’s guarantee institution is responsible for meeting employees’ outstanding claims, it must be considered that an employer in a state of insolvency does not carry out activities in the territories of at least two Member States, within the meaning of that provision, where the employment contract of the worker in question provides that his or her primary and habitual place of employment is in the territory of the Member State in which the employer has its registered office, but during an equal proportion of his or her working time that worker performs his or her duties remotely from another Member State where his or her main place of residence is situated.
(1) OJ C 165, 19.4.2022.