This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62016CN0200
Case C-200/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal de Justiça (Portugal) lodged on 12 April 2016 — Securitas — Serviços e Tecnologia de Segurança SA v ICTS Portugal — Consultadoria de Aviação Comercial SA and Others
Case C-200/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal de Justiça (Portugal) lodged on 12 April 2016 — Securitas — Serviços e Tecnologia de Segurança SA v ICTS Portugal — Consultadoria de Aviação Comercial SA and Others
Case C-200/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal de Justiça (Portugal) lodged on 12 April 2016 — Securitas — Serviços e Tecnologia de Segurança SA v ICTS Portugal — Consultadoria de Aviação Comercial SA and Others
OJ C 211, 13.6.2016, p. 36–37
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
13.6.2016 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 211/36 |
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal de Justiça (Portugal) lodged on 12 April 2016 — Securitas — Serviços e Tecnologia de Segurança SA v ICTS Portugal — Consultadoria de Aviação Comercial SA and Others
(Case C-200/16)
(2016/C 211/47)
Language of the case: Portuguese
Referring court
Supremo Tribunal de Justiça
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Securitas — Serviços e Tecnologia de Segurança SA
Defendants: ICTS Portugal — Consultadoria de Aviação Comercial SA, Arthur George Resendes, Jorge Alberto Rodrigues Pereira, José Manuel Duque Medeiros, José Octávio Pimentel do Couto Macedo, Márcio Aurélio Mendes, Marco Paulo Viveiros Câmara, Milton César Pimentel Freitas, Milton Miguel Miranda Santos, Nelson Manuel Rego Sousa, Osvaldo Manuel Rego Arruda, Pedro Miguel Amaral Pacheco, Pedro Miguel Costa Tavares, Rui Miguel Costa Tavares, Rui Sérgio Gouveia Terra, Jaime Amorim Amaral Melo, Marcos Daniel Varandas Carvalho, Valter Eurico Rocha da Silva e Sousa
Questions referred
|
1. |
Does the situation in the present case amount to a transfer of an undertaking or business, where the defendant, ‘ICTS’, has been transferred to the defendant, ‘SECURITAS’, following a public call for tenders in which the successful bidder, ‘SECURITAS’, was awarded a contract for the provision of security guard services at the Ponta Delgada port in the island of São Miguel, Azores, and does that situation amount to a transfer of an economic entity for the purposes of Article 1(1)(a) of Council Directive 2001/23/EC (1) of 12 March 2001? |
|
2. |
Is the situation in the present case merely one in which a competing undertaking succeeds another following the award of a service provision contract to the successful undertaking in a public call for tenders, and as such is excluded from the notion of a transfer of an undertaking or business for the purposes of that directive? |
|
3. |
Does Clause 13(2) of the Collective Agreement concluded by AES, AESIRF, STAD and other trade union federations contravene Community law on the meaning of a transfer of an undertaking or business arising from Council Directive 2001/23/EC of 12 March 2001 in that it stipulates that: ‘the loss of a customer by an operator following an award of a service contract to another operator shall not fall within the notion of a transfer of an undertaking or business’? |
(1) Council Directive 2001/23/EC of 12 March 2001 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees’ rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses (OJ 2001 L 82, p. 16).