Mary Brown v. Rentokil Limited, Judgment of the Court, 30 June 1998 (1), Case C-394/96
Articles 2(1) and 5(1) of Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 preclude dismissal of a female worker at any time during her pregnancy for absences due to incapacity for work caused by illness resulting from that pregnancy.
The fact that a female worker has been dismissed during her pregnancy on the basis of a contractual term providing that the employer may dismiss employees of either sex after a stipulated number of weeks of continuous absence does not affect the answer given.
Caisse Nationale d'Assurance Vieillesse des Travailleurs Salariés (CNAVTS) v. Évelyne Thibault, Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) 30 April 1998 (1), Case C-136/95
Articles 2(3) and 5(1) of Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 preclude national rules which deprive a woman of the right to an assessment of her performance and, consequently, to the possibility of qualifying for promotion because she was absent from the undertaking on account of maternity leave.
Lisa Jacqueline Grant v. South-West Trains Ltd - Judgment of the Court February 1998, Case C-249/96
The refusal by an employer to allow travel concessions to the person of the same sex with whom a worker has a stable relationship, where such concessions are allowed to a worker's spouse or to the person of the opposite sex with whom a worker has a stable relationship outside marriage, does not constitute discrimination prohibited by Article 119 of the EC Treaty or Council Directive 75/117/EEC of 10 February 1975.
Handels og Kontorfunktionarernes Forbund i Danmark som mandatar for Helle Elisabeth Larsson mod Dansk Handel og Service som mandatar for fotex Supermarked A/S, Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) 29 May 1997, Case C-400/95
Unless otherwise stipulated in national legislation, protection of women, in particular in relation to pregnancy and maternity, issued according to Articles 2(3) of Council Directive 76/207/EEC preclude national rules which deprive a woman of the right to an assessment of her performance and, consequently, to the possibility of qualifying for promotion because she was absent from the undertaking on account of maternity leave. Article 5(1) Combined with Article 2(1) are not precluding dismissal because of absence due to an illness caused by pregnancy and birth, even if the illness has occurred during the pregnancy and has continued after the maternity leave.
Larsson v. Fotex Supermarked, [1997] ECR I-2757, Case C-400/95
The Court ruled that account may be taken of a woman's absence from work between the beginning of her pregnancy and the beginning of her maternity leave when calculating absence for reasons of dismissal. It affirmed that during the period of maternity leave a woman is protected from dismissal. It however remarked that when the Pregnancy Directive (Directive 92/85) came into full force and effect, protection will also be afforded from the start of pregnancy.
Commission of the European Communities, v. Italian Republic, - Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) 4 December 1997 (1), Case C-207/96
By retaining in national law rules prohibiting nightwork by women, contrary to Article 5 of Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976.
Mary Teresa Magorrian, Irene Patricia Cunningham v. Eastern Health and Social Services Board, Department of Health and Social Services, Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) 11 December 1997 (1), Case C-246/96
Periods of service completed by part-time workers who have suffered indirect discrimination based on sex must be taken into account as from 8 April 1976, the date of the judgment in Case C-43/75 Defrenne, for the purposes of calculating the additional benefits to which they are entitled.
P. against S. and Cornwall County Council, Judgment of the Court, 1996, Case C-13/94.
Given the objective of Directive 76/207, Article 5(1) prevents discharge of a transsexual due to change of sex. As it is one of a person's basic rights not to be exposed to differential treatment based on sex, the Directive also applies to the differential treatment rising from the person's shift of sex, since such differential treatment essentially, if not solely, is based on the person's sex. Discharge of such a person with the argument that the concerned intends to go through or has gone through a change of sex exposes the concerned person for a treatment which is less favourable compared to the persons of the sex which the concerned person was regarded to belong to before the operation.
Joan Gillespie and others vs. Northern Health and Social Services Board and others, Judgment of the Court 16. February 1996, Case C-342/93
The term wages in the Treaty Article 119 and Council Directive 75/117/EEC of 10 February 1975 includes all the payments that the employee gets due to the employment, deriving directly or indirectly from the employer.
In so far as the calculation of these payments rests upon the wages the female employee has received before the start of her maternity leave, the payments must include increases of salary occurring between the beginning of the period, the reference salary includes, and the finish of the maternity leave from the time they went into force. To exclude the female employee from such rise of salary during her maternity leave would be a discrimination of her solely in her capacity of employee, as she would have received higher wages if she had not been pregnant.
Gabriele Habermann-Beltermann vs. Arbeiterwohlfahrt, Bezirksverband Ndb/Opf.eV, Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) 5. May 1994, Case C-421/92
Council Directive 76/207/EEC: Article 2 (1) and 2(3) together with Article 3(1) and Article 5(1) in Council Directive 76/207 precludes that an employment contract - for an indefinite period concerning night work and which is agreed between the employer and employee who were at the time of entering into the contract both ignorant of the pregnancy - is declared null and void because of an legal prohibition against night work in national legislation during the period of pregnancy and breast-feeding. The Council Directive also precludes that the employer contest the validity of the contract based on a delusion as to essential preconditions in regard to the employee at the time of entering into the contract. Since the contract was for an indefinite period the prohibition against pregnant women working in the night only was obliging for a limited period compared to the total period of the contract.
|