This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62016CN0102
Case C-102/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Belgium) lodged on 19 February 2016 — Vaditrans BVBA v Belgische Staat
Case C-102/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Belgium) lodged on 19 February 2016 — Vaditrans BVBA v Belgische Staat
Case C-102/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Belgium) lodged on 19 February 2016 — Vaditrans BVBA v Belgische Staat
IO C 165, 10.5.2016, p. 8–8
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
- Date of document:
- 19/02/2016
- Date lodged:
- 19/02/2016
- Author:
- An Chúirt Bhreithiúnais
- Form:
- Faisnéis bhreithiúnach
- Authentic language:
- Ollainnis
- Type of procedure:
- Tarchur le haghaidh réamhrialú
- Link
- Select all documents mentioning this document
- Case affecting:
-
- Submits a preliminary question about 12012P049
- Submits a preliminary question about 32006R0561 airteagal 19
- Submits a preliminary question about 32006R0561 airteagal 8 mír 6
- Submits a preliminary question about 32006R0561 airteagal 8 mír 8
- Link
|
10.5.2016 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 165/8 |
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Belgium) lodged on 19 February 2016 — Vaditrans BVBA v Belgische Staat
(Case C-102/16)
(2016/C 165/09)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Raad van State
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Vaditrans BVBA
Defendant: Belgische Staat
Questions referred
|
1. |
Must Article 8(6) and (8) of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport and amending Council Regulations (EEC) No 3821/85 and (EC) No 2135/98 and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 be interpreted as meaning that the regular weekly rest periods referred to in Article 8(6) of the same regulation may not be spent inside the vehicle? |
|
2. |
If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, does Article 8(6) and (8) of Regulation No 561/2006, read in conjunction with Article 19 of the same regulation, then breach the principle of legality in criminal proceedings as expressed in Article 49 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2) in so far as the abovementioned provisions of Regulation No 561/2006 do not expressly provide for the prohibition on spending the regular weekly rest periods referred to in Article 8(6) of the same regulation inside the vehicle? |
|
3. |
If the answer to the first question is in the negative, does Regulation No 561/2006 then permit Member States to lay down a prohibition in their national law on spending the regular weekly rest periods referred to in Article 8(6) of the same regulation inside a vehicle? |
