- 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-684/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesarbeitsgericht (Germany) lodged on 27 December 2016 — Max-Planck-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Wissenschaften eV v Tetsuji Shimizu
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016CN0684
62016CN0684
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
3.4.2017
Official Journal of the European Union
C 104/32
(Case C-684/16)
(2017/C 104/46)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Max-Planck-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Wissenschaften eV
Defendant: Tetsuji Shimizu
Questions referred
1.Does Article 7(1) 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 (Directive 2003/88/EC) or Article 31(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) preclude national legislation, such as Paragraph 7 of the Bundesurlaubsgesetz (Federal law on leave, ‘the BUrlG’), under which, as one of the methods of exercising the right to annual leave, an employee must apply for such leave with an indication of his preferred dates so that the leave entitlement does not lapse at the end of the relevant period without compensation and under which an employer is not required, unilaterally and with binding effect for the employee, to specify when that leave be taken by the employee within the relevant period?
2.If the first question is answered in the affirmative: Does this apply even where the employment relationship is between two private persons?
Language of the case: German.
(1) OJ 2003 L 299, p. 9.