EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-392/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Cluj (Romania) lodged on 24 June 2021 — TJ v Inspectoratul General pentru Imigrări

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021CN0392

62021CN0392

June 24, 2021
With Google you find a lot.
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

27.9.2021

Official Journal of the European Union

C 391/8

(Case C-392/21)

(2021/C 391/13)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant (applicant at first instance): TJ

Respondent (defendant at first instance): Inspectoratul General pentru Imigrări

Questions referred

1.Is the expression ‘special corrective appliances’, used in Article 9 of Council Directive 90/270/EEC of 29 May 1990 on the minimum safety and health requirements for work with display screen equipment, to be interpreted as excluding spectacles with corrective lenses?

2.Must the expression ‘special corrective appliances’, used in Article 9 of Council Directive 90/270/EEC, be understood solely to mean appliances used exclusively at the place of work and/or in the performance of employment duties?

3.Does the obligation to provide a special corrective appliance, provided for by Article 9 of Council Directive 90/270/EEC, refer exclusively to the acquisition of the appliance by the employer, or may it be interpreted more broadly, namely to include an obligation upon the employer to reimburse the costs incurred by the worker in purchasing the appliance him or herself?

4.Is it consistent with Article 9 of Council Directive 90/270/EEC for an employer to cover such costs by means of a general increase in remuneration which is paid on a continuing basis and referred to as an ‘increase for arduous working conditions’?

Language of the case: Romanian

(1) OJ 1990 L 156, p. 14.

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia