Request for a preliminary ruling from the Riigikohus (Estonia) lodged on 22 March 2024 – A and Others v Tallinna linn

(Case C-219/24, Tallinna linn)

Language of the case: Estonian

Referring court

Riigikohus

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: A and Others

Defendant: Tallinna linn

Questions referred

Can Article 14(3) of Directive 2000/54/EC ¹ of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 September 2000 on the protection of workers from risks related to exposure to biological agents at work and points 1 and 2 of Annex VII thereto, read in conjunction with recital 8, Article 1(1) and Article 3(1) and (2) of that directive, be interpreted as compatible with a provision whereby employers are entitled to require their employees who are exposed to biological agents to undergo vaccination?

Explanatory questions:

(a)    Does vaccination constitute a measure of health protection at work within the meaning of Article 14(3) of Directive 2000/54/EC which the employer may order in the context of an existing employment contract without the consent of the worker exposed to biological agents?

(b)    Is it compatible with Article 1(3), Article 6(1) and (2)(a) and (g), and Article 9(1)(a) and (b) of Council Directive 89/391/EEC ¹ of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work and with Article 3(1), Article 31(1) and Article 52(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union for an employer to make vaccination compulsory in the context of an existing employment contract?

____________

¹ OJ 2000 L 262, p. 21.

¹ OJ 1989 L 183, p. 1.