EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62016CN0684

Case C-684/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesarbeitsgericht (Germany) lodged on 27 December 2016 — Max-Planck-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Wissenschaften eV v Tetsuji Shimizu

OJ C 104, 3.4.2017, p. 32–33 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

3.4.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 104/32


Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesarbeitsgericht (Germany) lodged on 27 December 2016 — Max-Planck-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Wissenschaften eV v Tetsuji Shimizu

(Case C-684/16)

(2017/C 104/46)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesarbeitsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Max-Planck-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Wissenschaften eV

Defendant: Tetsuji Shimizu

Questions referred

1.

Does Article 7(1) of 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 (Directive 2003/88/EC) (1) or Article 31(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) preclude national legislation, such as Paragraph 7 of the Bundesurlaubsgesetz (Federal law on leave, ‘the BUrlG’), under which, as one of the methods of exercising the right to annual leave, an employee must apply for such leave with an indication of his preferred dates so that the leave entitlement does not lapse at the end of the relevant period without compensation and under which an employer is not required, unilaterally and with binding effect for the employee, to specify when that leave be taken by the employee within the relevant period?

2.

If the first question is answered in the affirmative:

Does this apply even where the employment relationship is between two private persons?


(1)  OJ 2003 L 299, p. 9.


Top