EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62016CA0270
Case C-270/16: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 January 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Social No 1 de Cuenca — Spain) — Carlos Enrique Ruiz Conejero v Ferroser Servicios Auxiliares SA, Ministerio Fiscal (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2000/78/EC — Equal treatment in employment and occupation — Article 2(2)(b)(i) — Prohibition of discrimination based on disability — National legislation permitting, subject to certain conditions, the dismissal of an employee by reason of intermittent absences, even where justified — Worker’s absences resulting from illnesses linked to his disability — Difference in treatment based on disability — Indirect discrimination — Whether justified — Combating absenteeism in the workplace — Whether appropriate — Whether proportionate)
Case C-270/16: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 January 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Social No 1 de Cuenca — Spain) — Carlos Enrique Ruiz Conejero v Ferroser Servicios Auxiliares SA, Ministerio Fiscal (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2000/78/EC — Equal treatment in employment and occupation — Article 2(2)(b)(i) — Prohibition of discrimination based on disability — National legislation permitting, subject to certain conditions, the dismissal of an employee by reason of intermittent absences, even where justified — Worker’s absences resulting from illnesses linked to his disability — Difference in treatment based on disability — Indirect discrimination — Whether justified — Combating absenteeism in the workplace — Whether appropriate — Whether proportionate)
Case C-270/16: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 January 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Social No 1 de Cuenca — Spain) — Carlos Enrique Ruiz Conejero v Ferroser Servicios Auxiliares SA, Ministerio Fiscal (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 2000/78/EC — Equal treatment in employment and occupation — Article 2(2)(b)(i) — Prohibition of discrimination based on disability — National legislation permitting, subject to certain conditions, the dismissal of an employee by reason of intermittent absences, even where justified — Worker’s absences resulting from illnesses linked to his disability — Difference in treatment based on disability — Indirect discrimination — Whether justified — Combating absenteeism in the workplace — Whether appropriate — Whether proportionate)
IO C 83, 5.3.2018, p. 3–3
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
5.3.2018 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 83/3 |
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 January 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Social No 1 de Cuenca — Spain) — Carlos Enrique Ruiz Conejero v Ferroser Servicios Auxiliares SA, Ministerio Fiscal
(Case C-270/16) (1)
((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Directive 2000/78/EC - Equal treatment in employment and occupation - Article 2(2)(b)(i) - Prohibition of discrimination based on disability - National legislation permitting, subject to certain conditions, the dismissal of an employee by reason of intermittent absences, even where justified - Worker’s absences resulting from illnesses linked to his disability - Difference in treatment based on disability - Indirect discrimination - Whether justified - Combating absenteeism in the workplace - Whether appropriate - Whether proportionate))
(2018/C 083/03)
Language of the case: Spanish
Referring court
Juzgado de lo Social No 1 de Cuenca
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Carlos Enrique Ruiz Conejero
Defendant: Ferroser Servicios Auxiliares SA, Ministerio Fiscal
Operative part of the judgment
Article 2(2)(b)(i) of Council Directive 2008/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation must be interpreted as precluding national legislation under which an employer may dismiss a worker on the grounds of his intermittent absences from work, even if justified, in a situation where those absences are the consequence of sickness attributable to a disability suffered by that worker, unless that legislation, while pursuing the legitimate aim of combating absenteeism, does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that aim, which is a matter for the referring court to assess.