2012/13: Clarification of “closure of section” in relation to collective redundancy (PT)

An employee of a multinational group that experienced a downturn and carried out a collective redundancy, challenged the lawfulness of his redundancy. He claimed the grounds used by the employer were false because the section in which he used to work had not been closed down. The Supreme Court found the redundancy to have been lawful.

2012/13: Clarification of “closure of section” in relation to collective redundancy (PT)

An employee of a multinational group that experienced a downturn and carried out a collective redundancy, challenged the lawfulness of his redundancy. He claimed the grounds used by the employer were false because the section in which he used to work had not been closed down. The Supreme Court found the redundancy to have been lawful.

ECJ 15 December 2011, case C-257/10 (Försäkringskassan - v - Elisabeth Bergström), Social security

Mrs Bergström lived and worked in Switzerland for eight years. Her daughter was born there...

ECJ 15 December 2011, case C-257/10 (Försäkringskassan - v - Elisabeth Bergström), Social security

Mrs Bergström lived and worked in Switzerland for eight years. Her daughter was born there...

2012/2: One company cannot transfer staff to another against their will in the absence of a transfer of undertaking (CZ)

An employment transfer may only take place if there is a legal basis for it. Provision for a transfer of tasks or activities (or part of them) from one employer to another — which is a legal basis for employment transfer under the Labour Code — must be made in the contract or in another legal act, or it must consist of another legal fact. In this case, a contract between two employers stating that employees would be transferred was held not to be sufficient legal grounds for a transfer and, as such, the transfer was invalid.

2012/2: One company cannot transfer staff to another against their will in the absence of a transfer of undertaking (CZ)

An employment transfer may only take place if there is a legal basis for it. Provision for a transfer of tasks or activities (or part of them) from one employer to another — which is a legal basis for employment transfer under the Labour Code — must be made in the contract or in another legal act, or it must consist of another legal fact. In this case, a contract between two employers stating that employees would be transferred was held not to be sufficient legal grounds for a transfer and, as such, the transfer was invalid.

2012/15: Transfer of activities that do not form a separate unit at the transferee does not constitute a TOU (GE)

Following on from the ECJ’s ruling in Klarenberg, the Federal Labour Court (BAG) has held in two recent cases that the existence of an independent organisation at the transferor is a prerequisite for a transfer of undertaking.

2012/15: Transfer of activities that do not form a separate unit at the transferee does not constitute a TOU (GE)

Following on from the ECJ’s ruling in Klarenberg, the Federal Labour Court (BAG) has held in two recent cases that the existence of an independent organisation at the transferor is a prerequisite for a transfer of undertaking.

2011/9: Collective agreement that sets minimum fee for self-employed workers violates anti-trust law (NL)

Agreements restricting competition are covered by the anti-trust rules under Article 81 of the EC Treaty (now Article 101 of the TFEU) unless they meet the requirement for the “social exception” rule, as formulated by the ECJ in its Albany case law. A collective agreement that fixes minimum fees for self-employed workers does not meet these requirements.

2011/9: Collective agreement that sets minimum fee for self-employed workers violates anti-trust law (NL)

Agreements restricting competition are covered by the anti-trust rules under Article 81 of the EC Treaty (now Article 101 of the TFEU) unless they meet the requirement for the “social exception” rule, as formulated by the ECJ in its Albany case law. A collective agreement that fixes minimum fees for self-employed workers does not meet these requirements.