- 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-477/21, MÁV-START: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 2 March 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Miskolci Törvényszék — Hungary) — IH v MÁV-START Vasúti Személyszállító Zrt. (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Protection of the safety and health of workers — Organisation of working time — Article 31(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Directive 2003/88/EC — Articles 3 and 5 — Daily rest and weekly rest — National legislation providing for a minimum weekly rest period of 42 hours — Obligation to grant daily rest — Rules for granting)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021CA0477
62021CA0477
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 155/15
(Case C-477/21, (1) MÁV-START)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Protection of the safety and health of workers - Organisation of working time - Article 31(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Directive 2003/88/EC - Articles 3 and 5 - Daily rest and weekly rest - National legislation providing for a minimum weekly rest period of 42 hours - Obligation to grant daily rest - Rules for granting)
(2023/C 155/17)
Language of the case: Hungarian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: IH
Defendant: MÁV-START Vasúti Személyszállító Zrt.
Operative part of the judgment
1.Article 5 of Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time, read in the light of Article 31(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as meaning that the daily rest period provided for in Article 3 of that directive does not form part of the weekly rest period referred to in Article 5 of that directive, but is additional to it.
2.Articles 3 and 5 of Directive 2003/88, read in the light of Article 31(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as meaning that where national legislation provides for a weekly rest period exceeding 35 consecutive hours, the worker must be granted, in addition to that period, the daily rest as guaranteed by Article 3 of that directive.
3.Article 3 of Directive 2003/88, read in the light of Article 31(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as meaning that where a worker is granted a weekly rest period, he or she is also entitled to a daily rest period preceding that weekly rest period.
(1) OJ C 471, 22.11.2021.