Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62017CA0699

    Case C-699/17: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 4 April 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Austria) — proceedings brought by Allianz Vorsorgekasse AG (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Public Procurement — Conclusion of accession agreements with an occupational provident fund responsible for managing contributions of occupational solidarity — Conclusion requiring the agreement of employees or their representatives — Directive 2014/24/EU — Articles 49 and 56 TFEU — Principles of equal treatment and of non-discrimination — Obligation of transparency)

    IO C 206, 17.6.2019, p. 11–11 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    17.6.2019   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 206/11


    Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 4 April 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Austria) — proceedings brought by Allianz Vorsorgekasse AG

    (Case C-699/17) (1)

    (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Public Procurement - Conclusion of accession agreements with an occupational provident fund responsible for managing contributions of occupational solidarity - Conclusion requiring the agreement of employees or their representatives - Directive 2014/24/EU - Articles 49 and 56 TFEU - Principles of equal treatment and of non-discrimination - Obligation of transparency)

    (2019/C 206/12)

    Language of the case: German

    Referring court

    Verwaltungsgerichtshof

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Appellant: Allianz Vorsorgekasse AG

    Other parties: Bundestheater-Holding GmbH, Burgtheater GmbH, Wiener Staatsoper GmbH, Volksoper Wien GmbH, ART for ART Theaterservice GmbH, fair-finance Vorsorgekasse AG

    Operative part of the judgment

    Articles 49 and 56 TFEU, the principles of equal treatment and non-discrimination and the obligation of transparency must be interpreted as meaning that they are applicable to the conclusion of an accession agreement between an employer, a body governed by public law, and a company provident fund, with regard to the management and investment of contributions intended to finance severance payments paid to the employees of that employer, even though the conclusion of such an agreement is not the sole province of the employer, but requires the consent of either the staff or the works council.


    (1)  OJ C 104, 19.3.2018.


    Top