- 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-861/24, Societatea Națională [U]: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Constanța (Romania) lodged on 12 December 2024 – MB v Societatea Națională [U]
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024CN0861
62024CN0861
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
C series
—
C/2025/2350
28.4.2025
(Case C-861/24, Societatea Națională [U])
(C/2025/2350)
Language of the case: Romanian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Appellant and applicant at first instance: MB
Appellant and defendant at first instance: Societatea Națională [U]
Questions referred
Does a legal person whose capital is wholly owned by the State, which is established by the government of a Member State in the form of a joint stock company (a legal form subsumed in national law under the broader category of profit-making associations), but which, according to its instrument of constitution as adopted by a government decision, has as its purpose ‘to establish a functioning trade mechanism leading to the better valorisation of national agricultural resources and production’ and which is governed by a general meeting of shareholders composed of representatives appointed and mandated in writing by a ministry of that Member State in accordance with the announced agenda, enjoy the protection conferred by Article 16 and Article 17(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?
If so, do the provisions of Article 12(1) and Article 16(1) of Directive (EU) 2019/1158, (<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">1</span>) interpreted in the light of Article 16 and Article 17(1) of the Charter, preclude a national rule such as that contained in Article 25(2)(b) of [Ordonanța de urgență a Guvernului nr. 111/2010 privind concediul și indemnizația lunară pentru creșterea copiilor (Government Emergency Order No 111/2010 on parental leave and the corresponding monthly dependent child allowance)], which establishes a general and absolute prohibition on the dismissal of an employee during the period in which he or she is in receipt of a reintegration incentive (a social benefit paid by the State to employees returning from parental leave until one year after the expiry of the maximum period during which they could benefit from that leave), regardless of the actual cause of dismissal?
—
Directive (EU) 2019/1158 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on work-life balance for parents and carers and repealing Council Directive 2010/18/EU (OJ 2019 L 188, p.79).
—
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2350/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—