Request for a preliminary ruling from the Miskolci Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 6 March 2019 — UO v Készenléti Rendőrség
(Case C-211/19)
Language of the case: Hungarian
Referring court
Miskolci Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: UO
Defendant: Készenléti Rendőrség
Questions referred
Must Article 1(3) of Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time 1 be interpreted as meaning that the scope ratione personae of that directive is determined by Article 2 of Directive 89/391/EEC on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work? 2
If so, must Article 2(2) of Directive 89/391/EEC on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work be interpreted as meaning that Article 2(1) and (2) of [Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time] is not to be applied to police officers who are members of the professional staff of the Rapid Intervention Police?
____________
1 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 (OJ 2003 L 299, p. 9).
2 OJ 1989 L 183, p. 1.