Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62023CN0125

Case C-125/23, Unedic: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel d’Aix-En-Provence (France) lodged on 1 March 2023 — Association Unedic délégation AGS de Marseille v V, W, X, Y, Z, liquidator of company K

OJ C 189, 30.5.2023, p. 17–17 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

30.5.2023   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 189/17


Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel d’Aix-En-Provence (France) lodged on 1 March 2023 — Association Unedic délégation AGS de Marseille v V, W, X, Y, Z, liquidator of company K

(Case C-125/23, Unedic)

(2023/C 189/23)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour d’appel d’Aix-En-Provence

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Association Unedic délégation AGS de Marseille

Respondents: V, W, X, Y, Z, liquidator of company K

Questions referred

1.

Can Directive 2008/94/EC (1) be interpreted as allowing the guarantee institution to be precluded from taking over the guarantee of severance pay on termination of employment relationships where an employee declares the termination of his or her contract of employment after insolvency proceedings have been initiated?

2.

Is such an interpretation consistent with the wording and the purpose of that directive, and does it enable the results specified therein to be achieved?

3.

Does such an interpretation, based on the person who terminated the contract of employment during the period of insolvency, entail a difference in treatment between employees?

4.

If such a difference in treatment exists, is it objectively justified?


(1)  Directive 2008/94/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 on the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer (OJ 2008 L 283, p. 36).


Top