EELA Updates

Case report

2017-07-01

Croatia

2017/24 Failure of the transferor of a business to fully inform the transferee about employees’ rights (CR)

The transferee dismissed the plaintiff immediately upon the transfer, for business reasons. The plaintiff claimed the dismissal was invalid because the transferee did not consult the union representatives who were transferred. The Supreme Court held that, in the absence of a works council, the union representative has, by law, all rights and obligations with regard to information and consultation. Failure to abide by the information and consultation rules rendered the decision to dismiss invalid.

Vrhovni sud Republike Hrvatske (Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia), 2016-04-19

Summary

2017-07-01

2017/24 Failure of the transferor of a business to fully inform the transferee about employees’ rights (CR)

The transferee dismissed the plaintiff immediately upon the transfer, for business reasons. The plaintiff claimed the dismissal was invalid because the transferee did not consult the union representatives who were transferred. The Supreme Court held that, in the absence of a works council, the union representative has, by law, all rights and obligations with regard to information and consultation. Failure to abide by the information and consultation rules rendered the decision to dismiss invalid.

Vrhovni sud Republike Hrvatske (Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia), 2016-04-19

Case report

2014-12-03

Finland

2015/1 No obligation to inform employee representatives of transfer of business entity until final agreement (FI)

The management of a company informed the employee representatives that part of the company’s business – its stone building materials department – had been sold. It did so immediately after the purchase agreement was executed, 7½ hours before the transfer of ownership. The two responsible directors were prosecuted for violation of the Finnish Act on Co-operation within Undertakings (the “Codetermination Act”). At first instance, they were fined, but on appeal the court acquitted them. The Court of Appeal found that there was no legal obligation to inform the employee representatives until after reaching final agreement on the transfer of an undertaking and that the directors had informed the representatives “in good time” as provided by the law transposing Article 7 of the Acquired Rights Directive in Finland.

Turun hovioikeus Turku (Appeal Court of Turku), 2014-12-03

Summary

2014-12-03

2015/1 No obligation to inform employee representatives of transfer of business entity until final agreement (FI)

The management of a company informed the employee representatives that part of the company’s business – its stone building materials department – had been sold. It did so immediately after the purchase agreement was executed, 7½ hours before the transfer of ownership. The two responsible directors were prosecuted for violation of the Finnish Act on Co-operation within Undertakings (the “Codetermination Act”). At first instance, they were fined, but on appeal the court acquitted them. The Court of Appeal found that there was no legal obligation to inform the employee representatives until after reaching final agreement on the transfer of an undertaking and that the directors had informed the representatives “in good time” as provided by the law transposing Article 7 of the Acquired Rights Directive in Finland.

Turun hovioikeus Turku (Appeal Court of Turku), 2014-12-03

Case report

2009-11-18

France

2010/42: Directive 2001/23/EC not transposed fully: no horizontal effect (FR)

Article 7 (6) of Directive 2001/23/EC requires employers lacking staff representation within their organisation to inform their employees of an impending transfer of undertaking. Given that this provision has not been transposed into French domestic law, an employer who has failed to inform the relevant employees cannot be held liable for damages resulting from such failure.

Cour de cassation (French Supreme Court), 2009-11-18

Summary

2009-11-18

2010/42: Directive 2001/23/EC not transposed fully: no horizontal effect (FR)

Article 7 (6) of Directive 2001/23/EC requires employers lacking staff representation within their organisation to inform their employees of an impending transfer of undertaking. Given that this provision has not been transposed into French domestic law, an employer who has failed to inform the relevant employees cannot be held liable for damages resulting from such failure.

Cour de cassation (French Supreme Court), 2009-11-18