EU Court Judgment in Case C-134/22 G GmbH

Thursday 13th July 2023

Judgment in Case C-134/22 G GmbH

(Social Policy)

On 28 January 2020, an employee who had worked for the German company G GmbH since 1981 was informed that his employment contract with the company would be terminated. On 1 October 2019, insolvency proceedings were opened in respect of G GmbH, and on 17 January 2020, it was decided that G GmbH would cease trading completely by 30 April 2020 at the latest and that more than 10% of the 195 employees it employed would be made redundant (including the employee concerned).

On the same 17 January 2020, the consultation procedure with the works council, acting as the employees’ representative, was initiated. In the context of this consultation, the information referred to in the EU Directive on collective redundancies was communicated to the Works Council. However, no copy of this written communication was sent to the competent public authority, in this case the public employment agency in Osnabrück, Germany.

On 22 January 2020, the works council noted that it saw no possibility of avoiding the envisaged redundancies. On 23 January 2020, the public employment agency in Osnabrück was notified of the planned collective redundancies. The public employment office subsequently arranged counselling appointments for 153 employees affected by the planned redundancies.

In an action before the German courts, the employee concerned claimed that no copy of the communication sent to the works council on 17 January 2020 had been forwarded to the competent public employment agency, arguing that such forwarding constitutes a condition for the validity of the dismissal.

The Federal Labour Court, which is examining the case in Revision, considers that this omission does indeed constitute a breach of the German law transposing the EU Directive into national law. However, neither the directive nor national law provided for an explicit sanction for such a breach. In these circumstances, the Federal Court expressed doubts as to whether such a breach could also lead to nullity. Crucial to the analysis is whether the rule in question is intended to confer individual protection on workers.

The Federal Court has decided to refer this question to the Court of Justice.

Background Documents C-134/22