Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62020CN0152

    Case C-152/20: Request for a preliminary ruling from Tribunalul Mureș (Romania) lodged on 30 March 2020 — DG, EH v SC Gruber Logistics SRL

    OJ C 279, 24.8.2020, p. 23–23 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    24.8.2020   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 279/23


    Request for a preliminary ruling from Tribunalul Mureș (Romania) lodged on 30 March 2020 — DG, EH v SC Gruber Logistics SRL

    (Case C-152/20)

    (2020/C 279/31)

    Language of the case: Romanian

    Referring court

    Tribunalul Mureș

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Applicants: DG, EH

    Defendant: SC Gruber Logistics SRL

    Questions referred

    1.

    Is Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the choice of law applicable to an individual employment contract excludes the application of the law of the country in which the employee has habitually carried out his or her work or as meaning that the fact that a choice of law has been made excludes the application of the second sentence of Article 8(1) of that regulation?

    2.

    Is Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 to be interpreted as meaning that the minimum wage applicable in the country in which the employee has habitually carried out his or her work is a right that falls within the scope of ‘provisions that cannot be derogated from by agreement under the law that, in the absence of choice, would have been applicable’, within the meaning of the second sentence of Article 8(1) of the regulation?

    3.

    Is Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 to be interpreted as meaning that the specification, in an individual employment contract, of the provisions of the Romanian Labour Code does not equate to a choice of Romanian law, in so far as, in Romania, it is well-known that there is a legal obligation to include such a choice-of-law clause in individual employment contracts? In other words, is Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 to be interpreted as precluding national rules and practices pursuant to which a clause specifying the choice of Romanian law must necessarily be included in individual employment contracts?


    (1)  Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I) (OJ 2008 L 177, p. 6).


    Top