- 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-389/20: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 24 February 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Contencioso-Administrativo No 2 de Vigo — Spain) — CJ v Tesorería General de la Seguridad Social (TGSS) (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security — Directive 79/7/EEC — Article 4(1) — Prohibition of any discrimination on grounds of sex — Domestic workers — Protection against unemployment — Exclusion — Particular disadvantage to female workers — Legitimate social policy objectives — Proportionality)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62020CA0389
62020CA0389
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
19.4.2022
Official Journal of the European Union
C 165/11
(Case C-389/20) (1)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security - Directive 79/7/EEC - Article 4(1) - Prohibition of any discrimination on grounds of sex - Domestic workers - Protection against unemployment - Exclusion - Particular disadvantage to female workers - Legitimate social policy objectives - Proportionality)
(2022/C 165/12)
Language of the case: Spanish
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: CJ
Defendant: Tesorería General de la Seguridad Social (TGSS)
Re:
Article 4(1) of Council Directive 79/7/EEC of 19 December 1978 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security must be interpreted as precluding a national provision excluding unemployment benefits from the social security benefits granted to domestic workers by a statutory social security scheme, since that provision places female workers at a particular disadvantage as compared with male workers and is not justified by objective factors wholly unrelated to discrimination based on sex.
(1) OJ C 423, 7.12.2020.