CJEU Case C-531/23 / Judgment

HJ v US and MU
Policy area
Employment and social policy
Deciding body type
Court of Justice of the European Union
Type
Decision
Decision date
19/12/2024
ECLI (European case law identifier)
ECLI:EU:C:2024:1050
  • CJEU Case C-531/23 / Judgment

    Key facts of the case: 

    Reference for a preliminary ruling – Social policy – Protection of the safety and health of workers – Organisation of working time – Daily and weekly rest – Article 31(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Directive 2003/88/EC – Articles 3, 5, 6, 16, 17, 19 and 22 – Requirement to establish a system enabling the duration of time worked by domestic workers to be measured – Derogation – National legislation exempting domestic workers from the obligation to record actual time worked

    Outcome of the case: 

    On those grounds, the Court (Seventh Chamber) hereby rules:

    Articles 3, 5 and 6 of Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time, read in the light of Article 31(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation, and its interpretation by the national courts or an administrative practice based on such legislation, under which domestic employers are exempt from the obligation to establish a system enabling the duration of time worked by domestic workers to be measured, thereby depriving those workers of the possibility of determining objectively and reliably the number of hours worked and their distribution over time.

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter

    25. By its question, the referring court asks, in essence, whether Articles 3, 5 and 6 of Directive 2003/88, read in conjunction with Directives 2000/78, 2006/54 and 2010/41, and with Articles 20 and 21 and Article 31(2) of the Charter, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation under which domestic employers are exempt from the obligation to establish a system for measuring the length of time worked by domestic employees.

    ...

    27. At the outset, it must be recalled that the right of every worker to a limitation of maximum working hours and to daily and weekly rest periods not only constitutes a rule of EU social law of particular importance, but is also expressly enshrined in Article 31(2) of the Charter, which Article 6(1) TEU recognises as having the same legal value as the Treaties (judgment of 14 May 2019, CCOO, C‑55/18, EU:C:2019:402, paragraph 30 and the case-law cited).

    ...

    35. However, the arrangements made by the Member States to implement the requirements of Directive 2003/88 must in no circumstances be liable to render the rights enshrined in Article 31(2) of the Charter and Articles 3 and 5 and Article 6(b) of that directive meaningless (see, to that effect, judgment of 14 May 2019, CCOO, C‑55/18, EU:C:2019:402, paragraph 43 and the case-law cited).

    ...

    38. In the absence of a system for objectively and reliably measuring both the number of hours worked by the worker and their distribution over time as well as the number of hours worked in excess of normal working time as overtime, it appears to be excessively difficult, if not impossible in practice, for workers to ensure compliance with the rights conferred on them by Article 31(2) of the Charter and by Directive 2003/88, with a view to actually benefiting from the limitation on weekly working time and minimum daily and weekly rest periods provided for by that directive (see, to that effect, judgment of 14 May 2019, CCOO, C‑55/18, EU:C:2019:402, paragraphs 47 and 48).

    ...

    49. In the light of the case-law referred to in paragraphs 38 to 40 above, it must be held that the judicial interpretation of a provision of national law or an administrative practice based on such a provision, under which employers are exempt from establishing a system enabling the duration of the daily working time of each domestic worker to be measured, and which therefore deprive domestic workers of the possibility of determining objectively and reliably the number of hours worked and their distribution over time, clearly does not comply with the provisions of Directive 2003/88, and more specifically with the rights flowing from Article 3, 5 and 6 of that directive, read in the light of Article 31(2) of the Charter.

    ...

    62. In the light of the foregoing, the answer to the question referred is that Articles 3, 5 and 6 of Directive 2003/88, read in the light of Article 31(2) of the Charter, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation, and its interpretation by the national courts or an administrative practice based on such legislation, under which domestic employers are exempt from the obligation to establish a system enabling the duration of time worked by domestic workers to be measured, thereby depriving those workers of the possibility of determining objectively and reliably the number of hours worked and their distribution over time.

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter (original language)