- 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-531/23, Loredas: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia del País Vasco (Spain) lodged on 5 July 2023 — HJ v US, MU
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023CN0531
62023CN0531
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
EN
Series C
C/2023/1284
11.12.2023
(Case C-531/23, Loredas)
(C/2023/1284)
Language of the case: Spanish
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Appellant: HJ
Respondents: US, MU
Question referred
Must Articles 3, 5, 6, 16, 17, 17(4)(b), 19 and 22 of Directive 2003/88 (2) on the organisation of working time, Article 31(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, read in the light of the EU case-law (judgment of the Court of Justice of 14 May 2019, C-55/18 (3)), Articles 20 and 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 3(2) of the EC Treaty, Articles 1 and 4 of Directive 2010/41/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2010 on the application of the principle of equal treatment between men and women engaged in an activity in a self-employed capacity, (4) Articles 1, 4 and 5 of Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation, (5) and Articles 2 and 3 of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, (6) also read in the light of the EU case-law (judgment of the Court of Justice of 24 February 2022, C-389/20 (7)), be interpreted as precluding a legislative provision such as Article 9(3) of Real Decreto (Royal Decree) 1620/2011, which exempts an employer from the obligation to keep a record of a worker’s working time?
(1) The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any party to the proceedings.
(2) 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 (OJ 2003 L 299, p. 9).
(3) Judgment of 14 May 2019, CCOO (C-55/18, EU:C:2019:402).
(4) OJ 2010 L 80, p. 1.
(5) OJ 2006 L 204, p. 23.
(6) OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16.
(7) Judgment of 24 February 2022, TGSS (Domestic worker unemployment) (C-389/20, EU:C:2022:120).
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/1284/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)