124:
market in question or the personal situation of the person concerned, is objectively necessary to the attainment of the objective which is the vocational integration of unemployed older workers, it must be considered to go beyond what is appropriate and necessary in order to attain the objective pursued. Observance of the principle of proportionality requires every derogation from an individual right to reconcile, so far as is possible, the requirements of the principle of equal treatment with those of the aim pursued (see, to that effect, Case C-476/99
120:
unemployment, may lawfully, until the age at which they may claim their entitlement to a retirement pension, be offered fixed-term contracts of employment which may be renewed an indefinite number of times. This significant body of workers, determined solely on the basis of age, is thus in danger, during a substantial part of its members’ working life, of being excluded from the benefit of stable employment which, however, as the
Framework Agreement makes clear, constitutes a major element in the protection of workers.
162:
state and EU legislation, like
Directives, may be challenged on the ground that they fail to comply with the general principle of equal treatment. Third, because the court did not limit its remarks to the particular grounds of discrimination presently found in the equal treatment Directives (on sex, race, and disability, belief, sexual orientation and age) it follows that claims against discrimination on the basis of other characteristics may be possible (such as
115:, even though it did not have to be implemented until the end of 2006. It said that, in general terms, legislation that lets employers treat people differently because of their age “offends the principle” in international law of eliminating discrimination on the basis of age. The ECJ ruled that national courts must set aside any provision of national law which conflicts with the directive even before the period for implementation has expired.
103:) which allowed fixed term contracts for a two-year maximum, and otherwise were unlawful unless they could be objectively justified. But even this protection was removed (apparently to "promote employment") if the employee was over 60. Further amendments then changed the age to 52. Mr Mangold claimed that the lack of protection, over age 52, was unjustified age discrimination.
140:
Directive 1999/70 (see also, in this respect, paragraphs 51 and 64 above), and reference is made to the Court for a preliminary ruling, the Court must provide all the criteria of interpretation needed by the national court to determine whether those rules are compatible with such a principle (Case C-442/00
147:
76. Consequently, observance of the general principle of equal treatment, in particular in respect of age, cannot as such be conditional upon the expiry of the period allowed the Member States for the transposition of a directive intended to lay down a general framework for combating discrimination
139:
75. The principle of non-discrimination on grounds of age must thus be regarded as a general principle of
Community law. Where national rules fall within the scope of Community law, which is the case with Paragraph 14(3) of the TzBfG, as amended by the Law of 2002, as being a measure implementing
119:
64. ... application of national legislation such as that at issue in the main proceedings leads to a situation in which all workers who have reached the age of 52, without distinction, whether or not they were unemployed before the contract was concluded and whatever the duration of any period of
161:
is significant for three critical reasons. First, it means that a claim for equal treatment is available for private citizens on a horizontal situation. It is not necessary to wait for a
Directive to be implemented before making a claim to have caused discrimination. Second, it means that member
123:
65. In so far as such legislation takes the age of the worker concerned as the only criterion for the application of a fixed-term contract of employment, when it has not been shown that fixing an age threshold, as such, regardless of any other consideration linked to the structure of the labour
555:
245:
148:
on the grounds of age, in particular so far as the organisation of appropriate legal remedies, the burden of proof, protection against victimisation, social dialogue, affirmative action and other specific measures to implement such a directive are concerned.
92:
270:
305:
701:
131:
485:
175:
223:
402:
617:
500:
207:
570:
600:
514:
332:
706:
112:
458:
540:
294:
258:
443:
282:
585:
171:
67:
43:
395:
200:
388:
130:
ECR I‑2891, paragraph 39). Such national legislation cannot, therefore, be justified under
Article 6(1) of
624:
607:
590:
575:
560:
545:
490:
475:
448:
193:
71:
711:
234:
178:
which lists similar grounds to those already in the EU Directives but also adds "or other status".
470:
361:
352:
343:
170:, property or military service). It would be likely to reflect the jurisprudence from the
8:
530:
421:
380:
527:
418:
431:
96:
90:. The German government introduced the so-called Employment Promotion Act 1996 (
695:
650:
645:
634:
157:
Because it recognised that equal treatment is a general principle of EU law,
87:
185:
167:
18:
European Court of
Justice case about age discrimination in employment
126:
83:
371:
163:
111:
The ECJ held in its judgment the German law contravened the
410:
86:
man employed on a fixed term contract in a permanent
693:
74:(ECJ) about age discrimination in employment.
702:Anti-discrimination law in the European Union
619:Allonby v Accrington & Rossendale College
396:
201:
502:Lambeth LBC v Commission for Racial Equality
403:
389:
208:
194:
602:Kutz-Bauer v Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg
516:Tottenham Green Nursery v Marshall (No 2)
556:Kontofunktionaerernes Forbund v Danfoss
215:
113:Employment Equality Framework Directive
694:
459:R (Amicus) v SS for Trade and Industry
571:Rinner-Kühn v FWW Gebäudereinigung KG
541:Bilka-Kaufhaus GmbH v Weber von Hartz
384:
333:Kücükdeveci v Swedex GmbH & Co KG
308:R (Seymour-Smith) v SS for Employment
295:Abrahamsson and Anderson v Fogelqvist
259:Bilka-Kaufhaus GmbH v Weber von Hartz
189:
444:Johnston v Royal Ulster Constabulary
411:Sources on justifying discrimination
283:Marschall v Land Nordrhein Westfalen
586:Nimz v Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg
172:European Convention on Human Rights
144:ECR I-11915, paragraphs 30 to 32).
13:
14:
723:
271:Barber v Guardian Royal Exchange
152:
707:European Union labour case law
662:
101:Beschäftigungsförderungsgesetz
1:
678:
55:Equality, age discrimination
7:
181:
106:
10:
728:
82:Mangold was a 56-year-old
631:
614:
597:
582:
567:
552:
537:
525:
511:
497:
482:
467:
455:
440:
428:
416:
368:
359:
350:
341:
329:
317:
303:
291:
279:
267:
255:
243:
231:
221:
72:European Court of Justice
54:
49:
38:
34:European Court of Justice
30:
25:
686:A Casebook on Labour Law
670:A Casebook on Labour Law
656:
235:Defrenne v Sabena (No 2)
77:
471:Sirdar v The Army Board
247:Handels-og KF v Danfoss
688:(Hart 2019) ch 15, 657
672:(Hart 2019) ch 15, 657
150:
100:
70:was a case before the
117:
362:Directive 2000/78/EC
353:Directive 2000/43/EC
344:Directive 2006/54/EC
216:EU equality sources
142:Rodríguez Caballero
274:(1990) Case 262/88
641:
640:
528:Equality Act 2010
419:Equality Act 2010
378:
377:
132:Directive 2000/78
59:
58:
719:
673:
666:
620:
603:
517:
503:
432:Etam plc v Rowan
405:
398:
391:
382:
381:
310:
210:
203:
196:
187:
186:
95:
23:
22:
727:
726:
722:
721:
720:
718:
717:
716:
712:Ageism case law
692:
691:
681:
676:
667:
663:
659:
642:
637:
627:
618:
610:
601:
593:
578:
563:
548:
533:
521:
515:
507:
501:
493:
486:Kreil v Germany
478:
463:
451:
436:
424:
412:
409:
379:
374:
364:
355:
346:
337:
325:
313:
306:
299:
298:(2000) C-407/98
287:
286:(1997) C-409/95
275:
263:
262:(1984) C-170/84
251:
239:
227:
217:
214:
184:
155:
109:
91:
80:
19:
12:
11:
5:
725:
715:
714:
709:
704:
690:
689:
680:
677:
675:
674:
660:
658:
655:
654:
653:
648:
639:
638:
632:
629:
628:
615:
612:
611:
598:
595:
594:
583:
580:
579:
568:
565:
564:
553:
550:
549:
538:
535:
534:
526:
523:
522:
512:
509:
508:
498:
495:
494:
483:
480:
479:
468:
465:
464:
456:
453:
452:
441:
438:
437:
429:
426:
425:
417:
414:
413:
408:
407:
400:
393:
385:
376:
375:
369:
366:
365:
360:
357:
356:
351:
348:
347:
342:
339:
338:
330:
327:
326:
321:Mangold v Helm
318:
315:
314:
304:
301:
300:
292:
289:
288:
280:
277:
276:
268:
265:
264:
256:
253:
252:
244:
241:
240:
232:
229:
228:
222:
219:
218:
213:
212:
205:
198:
190:
183:
180:
159:Mangold v Helm
154:
151:
108:
105:
79:
76:
63:Mangold v Helm
57:
56:
52:
51:
47:
46:
40:
36:
35:
32:
28:
27:
26:Mangold v Helm
17:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
724:
713:
710:
708:
705:
703:
700:
699:
697:
687:
684:E McGaughey,
683:
682:
671:
668:E McGaughey,
665:
661:
652:
651:EU labour law
649:
647:
646:UK labour law
644:
643:
636:
635:UK labour law
630:
626:
622:
621:
613:
609:
605:
604:
596:
592:
588:
587:
581:
577:
573:
572:
566:
562:
558:
557:
551:
547:
543:
542:
536:
532:
529:
524:
519:
518:
510:
505:
504:
496:
492:
488:
487:
481:
477:
473:
472:
466:
461:
460:
454:
450:
446:
445:
439:
434:
433:
427:
423:
420:
415:
406:
401:
399:
394:
392:
387:
386:
383:
373:
367:
363:
358:
354:
349:
345:
340:
335:
334:
328:
323:
322:
316:
311:
309:
302:
297:
296:
290:
285:
284:
278:
273:
272:
266:
261:
260:
254:
249:
248:
242:
237:
236:
230:
225:
220:
211:
206:
204:
199:
197:
192:
191:
188:
179:
177:
173:
169:
165:
160:
149:
145:
143:
137:
135:
133:
129:
128:
121:
116:
114:
104:
102:
98:
94:
89:
88:full-time job
85:
75:
73:
69:
65:
64:
53:
48:
45:
41:
37:
33:
29:
24:
21:
16:
685:
669:
664:
616:
599:
584:
569:
554:
539:
513:
499:
484:
469:
457:
442:
430:
331:
320:
319:
307:
293:
281:
269:
257:
246:
233:
158:
156:
153:Significance
146:
141:
138:
136:
125:
122:
118:
110:
81:
62:
61:
60:
20:
15:
696:Categories
679:References
531:s 19(2)(d)
176:Article 14
168:education
93:‹See Tfd›
625:C-256/01
608:C-187/00
591:C-184/89
576:C-171/88
561:C-109/88
546:C-170/84
491:C-285/98
476:C-273/97
462:EWHC 860
449:C-222/84
435:IRLR 150
182:See also
174:, where
107:Judgment
68:C-144/04
50:Keywords
44:C-144/04
39:Citation
623:(2004)
606:(2003)
589:(1991)
574:(1989)
559:(1989)
544:(1984)
520:ICR 320
506:ICR 768
489:(2000)
474:(1999)
447:(1986)
226:art 157
127:Lommers
66:(2005)
42:(2005)
372:EU law
336:(2010)
324:(2005)
312:(1999)
250:(1989)
238:(1976)
97:German
84:German
657:Notes
422:Sch 9
164:caste
78:Facts
31:Court
633:see
370:See
224:TFEU
698::
166:,
134:.
99::
404:e
397:t
390:v
209:e
202:t
195:v
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.