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
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) and Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Freedom to provide services - Posting of workers - Article 56 TFEU - Directive 2014/67/EU - Articles 9 and 20 - Reporting of workers - Retention of records of wages - Penalties - Proportionality - Fines of a predefined minimum amount - Cumulative - No upper limit - Court fees - Manifest inadmissibility)
(2020/C 68/26)
Language of the case: German
Applicants: EX EX (C-140/19 and C-141/19), OK (C-492/19), PL (C-493/19), QM (C-494/19)
Defendant: Bezirkshauptmannschaft Hartberg-Fürstenfeld
Intervener: Finanzpolizei
Article 20 of Directive 2014/67/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the enforcement of Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services and amending Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 on administrative cooperation through the Internal Market Information System (‘the IMI Regulation’) must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which lays down, in the event of non-compliance with labour law obligations relating to the reporting of workers and the retention of records of wages, the imposition of high fines:
which may not be lower than a predefined amount;
which are imposed cumulatively in respect of each worker concerned and without an upper limit, and
to which is added a contribution to court costs of 20 % of the amount of the fines if the appeal against the decision imposing those fines is dismissed.
(1)
OJ C 187, 3.6.2019.
OJ C 328, 30.9.2019.