Reports of Cases

2004 I-08835

Subject-matter

Interpretation of Council Directive 93/104/EC concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time ─ Scope (reference to Article 2 of Directive 89/391/EC in Article 1(3) of the directive) ─ Whether paramedics of the rescue service are included ─ Whether the exclusion in respect of road transport (Article 1(3) of the directive) covers road transport by paramedics ─ Formal requirements governing individual agreement by the employee to working time exceeding from time to time 48 hours per week (Article 18(1)(b)(i) of the directive) ─ Possibility of reliance (as against a private employer) on Article 6 of the directive before the courts

Systematic classification scheme

Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 118A : paragraphs 76, 91
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 10 : paragraph 110
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 249 -L3 : paragraphs 112, 113
• Directive 89/391 : paragraphs 4, 54
• Directive 89/391 -A02 : paragraphs 1, 5, 47, 48, 59, 63
• Directive 89/391 -A02P1 : paragraphs 49, 52
• Directive 89/391 -A02P2L1 : paragraphs 50 - 53, 55, 58
• Directive 92/50 : paragraph 73
• Directive 93/104 : paragraphs 4, 61, 68, 73, 77, 82, 85, 93, 99, 118
• Directive 93/104 -A01 : paragraph 6
• Directive 93/104 -A01P1 : paragraphs 76, 91
• Directive 93/104 -A01P3 : paragraphs 47, 48, 59, 60, 62 - 65, 67, 69, 72, 74
• Directive 93/104 -A02 : paragraph 7
• Directive 93/104 -A06 : paragraphs 9, 78, 84, 97
• Directive 93/104 -A06PT2 : paragraphs 87, 88, 90, 92, 100 - 102, 104 - 106, 119, 120
• Directive 93/104 -A15 : paragraphs 10, 96
• Directive 93/104 -A16 : paragraph 11
• Directive 93/104 -A17 : paragraph 12
• Directive 93/104 -A17P1 : paragraph 97
• Directive 93/104 -A17P2PT2PT1LCPT3 : paragraphs 62, 71, 97
• Directive 93/104 -A17P4 : paragraph 105
• Directive 93/104 -A18 : paragraph 13
• Directive 93/104 -A18P1LBLIT1 : paragraphs 75, 78 - 81, 86, 98, 105
• Directive 93/104 -C1 : paragraphs 76, 91
• Directive 93/104 -C4 : paragraphs 76, 91
• Directive 93/104 -C7 : paragraphs 76, 91
• Directive 93/104 -C8 : paragraphs 76, 91
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -14/83 : paragraphs 110, 113
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -152/84 : paragraph 108
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -106/89 : paragraphs 110, 118
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -6/90 : paragraph 103
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -91/92 : paragraphs 108, 110, 113
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -334/92 : paragraph 112
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -129/96 : paragraph 110
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -63/97 : paragraph 113
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -76/97 : paragraph 73
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -131/97 : paragraphs 110, 115
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -240/98 : paragraph 113
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -303/98 : paragraphs 48, 52, 80, 105
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -456/98 : paragraph 117
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -173/99 : paragraph 100
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -241/99 : paragraph 52
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -62/00 : paragraph 103
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -133/00 : paragraph 66
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -160/01 : paragraph 114
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -408/01 : paragraph 113
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -151/02 : paragraphs 67, 91, 93, 96, 98, 99
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -201/02 : paragraph 108

Operative part

• Interprets : Directive 89/391 -A02
• Interprets : Directive 93/104 -A01P3
• Interprets : Directive 93/104 -A06PT2
• Interprets : Directive 93/104 -A18P1LBLIT1

Opinion

• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 10 : points 18, 23
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 249 -L3 : points 14, 24
  
• Directive 65/65 : point 41
  
• Directive 68/151 : point 26
  
• Directive 71/305 : point 41
  
• Directive 72/166 : point 32
  
• Directive 76/464 : point 38
  
• Directive 77/91 -A25 : point 31
  
• Directive 80/987 : point 27
  
• Directive 83/189 -A08 : point 40
  
• Directive 83/189 -A09 : point 40
  
• Directive 83/513 : point 38
  
• Directive 84/5 : point 32
  
• Directive 86/653 : point 34
  
• Court of Justice - Rules of Procedure (1991) -A44P4 : point 3
  
• Directive 93/13 : point 28
  
• Directive 93/104 : point 46
  
• Directive 93/104 -A06PT2 : points 2, 13, 22, 44, 45, 48, 49
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -6/64 : point 42
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -48/71 : point 29
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -106/77 : point 42
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -148/78 : point 42
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -8/81 : point 22
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -152/84 : point 21
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -222/84 : point 23
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -14/86 : point 38
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -80/86 : point 38
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -103/88 : points 22, 41
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -106/89 : points 21, 24, 26
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -101/91 : point 29
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -91/92 : point 24
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -334/92 : points 18, 24, 27
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -46/93 : point 45
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -441/93 : point 31
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -129/94 : point 32
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -194/94 : point 40
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -201/94 : point 41
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -246/94 : point 22
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -168/95 : point 37
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -180/95 : point 33
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -215/97 : point 34
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -319/97 : point 22
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -435/97 : point 41
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -240/98 : point 28
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -443/98 : points 40, 46
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -456/98 : points 24, 35
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -157/02 : point 22
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -201/02 : point 41
  

Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

Information not available

Date of the Opinion

• 06/05/2003

• 27/04/2004

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

05/10/2004

References

Publication in the Official Journal

Application: OJ C 3 from 05.01.2002, p.15

Judgment: OJ C 300 from 04.12.2004, p.2

Name of the parties

Pfeiffer and Others

Notes on Academic Writings

1. Thüsing, Gregor ; Heßeler, Benjamin: Entscheidungen zum Wirtschaftsrecht 2004 p.1147-1148 (DE)
2. Konijn, Y.: Sociaal recht 2004 p.441-443 (NL)
3. Belorgey, Jean-Marc ; Gervasoni, Stéphane ; Lambert, Christian: Absence d'effet direct horizontal des directives, L'actualité juridique ; droit administratif 2004 p.2265-2267 (FR)
4. Idot, Laurence: Application des directives sur la sécurité et la santé du travail à des secouristes. Le dépassement du temps maximal de travail autorisé par une directive communautaire ne peut résulter d'une simple référence dans le contrat de travail à une convention collective..., Europe 2004 Décembre Comm. nº 404 p. 17-18 (FR)
5. Cingolo, Antonio: Sul c.d. "effetto orizzontale" delle direttive comunitarie, Rassegna dell'avvocatura dello Stato 2004 I p.1126-1128 (IT)
6. Lhernould, Jean-Philippe: Le temps de travail en quête de nouveaux repères. À propos de l'arrêt Pfeiffer et de la proposition de directive du 22 septembre 2004, Revue de jurisprudence sociale 2004 p.871-881 (FR)
7. Capelli, Fausto: L'efficacia delle direttive: due modeste proposte per risolvere un problema antico, Diritto comunitario e degli scambi internazionali 2004 p.755-759 (IT)
8. Lörcher, Klaus: Arbeitszeitrichtlinie: Anwendung auf Rettungsassistenten — Wöchentliche Höchstarbeitszeit — Unmittelbare Wirkung, EuroAS: Informationsdienst europäisches Arbeits- und Sozialrecht 2004 p.153-159 (DE)
9. Frenz, Walter: Deutsches Verwaltungsblatt 2005 p.40-42 (DE)
10. Matthiessen, Michael ; Shea, Dennis: Europarechtswidrige tarifliche Arbeitszeitregelungen, Der Betrieb 2005 p.106-109 (DE)
11. Widdershoven, R.J.G.M.: Administratiefrechtelijke beslissingen ; Rechtspraak bestuursrecht 2005 nº 16 (NL)
12. Conti, Roberto: Direttive comunitarie dettagliate ed efficacia diretta nei rapporti interprivati: il timone passa al giudice nazionale, Il Corriere giuridico 2005 p.188-196 (IT)
13. Abig, Constanze: Zeitschrift für europäisches Sozial- und Arbeitsrecht 2005 p.93-100 (DE)
14. Prechal, S.: S.E.W. ; Sociaal-economische wetgeving 2005 p.97-99 (NL)
15. Frenz, Walter: Verpflichtungen Privater durch Richtlinien und Grundfreiheiten, Europäisches Wirtschafts- & Steuerrecht - EWS 2005 p.104-108 (DE)
16. Ricci, G.: Il Foro italiano 2005 IV Col.23-25 (IT)
17. Riesenhuber, Karl ; Domröse, Ronny: Richtlinienkonforme Rechtsfindung und nationale Methodenlehre, Recht der internationalen Wirtschaft 2005 p.47-54 (DE)
18. Schlachter, Monika: Richtlinienkonforme Rechtsfindung - ein neues Stadium im Kooperationsverhältnis zwischen EuGH und den nationalen Gerichten, Recht der Arbeit 2005 p.115-120 (DE)
19. Pallotta, Oreste: Effetto orizzontale delle direttive? Solo se indiretto, Diritto pubblico comparato ed europeo 2005 p.505-509 (IT)
20. Mok, M.R.: Nederlandse jurisprudentie ; Uitspraken in burgerlijke en strafzaken 2005 nº 333 (NL)
21. Jánošíková, Martina: Rozsudok "Deutsches Rotes Kreuz", Vyber z rozhodnutí Súdneho dvora Európskych spolocenstiev 2005 p.68-69 (SK)
22. Prechal, Sacha: Joined Cases C-397/01 to C-403/01, Bernhard Pfeiffer et al., Common Market Law Review 2005, Volume 42, Issue 5, p. 1445-1463 (EN)
23. Meyer, Francis: Droit communautaire du travail, Recueil Le Dalloz 2005 Pan. p.2783-2789 (FR)
24. Cosio, Roberto: L'orario di lavoro tra Corte di giustizia e legislatore comunitario: un dialogo tra sordi?, Il Foro italiano 2006 IV Col 217-220 (IT)
25. Karollus, Margit Maria: Zur Einwirkung des Gemeinschaftsrechts auf das nationale Recht nach der jüngsten Rechtsprechung des EuGH - Konsequenzen aus den Entscheidungen des EuGH in den verb. Rs. C-397/01 bis C-403/01 (Pfeiffer) und der Rs. C-237/02 (Freiburger Kommunalbauten), Gegenwärtiger Stand und zukünftige Entwicklungen des EU-Binnenmarktes 2006 p.75-98 (DE)
26. Herresthal, Carsten: Die Grenzen der richtlinienkonformen Rechtsfortbildung im Kaufrecht, Wertpapier-Mitteilungen 2007 p.1354-1360 (DE)
27. Rofes i Pujol, Maria Isabel: Bernhard Pfeiffer y otros contra Deutsches Rotes Kreuz Kreisverband Waldshut – (Asuntos acumulados C-397/01 a C-403/01), El Derecho de la Unión Europea visto por el Abogado General – Homenaje a Dámaso Ruíz-Jarabo Colomer a través de sus conclusiones (Ed. Iustel – Madrid) 2013 p.40-45 (ES)
28. Popova, Zhasmin: Прилагане на правото на ЕС на национално равнище, Юридически свят 2015 n° 1 p.11-26 (BG)
29. Debelak, Marijan: Nekateri vidiki organizacije delovnega časa in plačila v mednarodni ureditvi, Pravosodni bilten 2017 nº 1 p.9-40 (SL)
30. Janežić, Marjeta: UREDITEV DELOVNEGA ČASA V SKLADU Z DIREKTIVO O DELOVNEM ČASU, Pravosodni bilten 2017 nº 2 p.157-170 (SL)

Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Arbeitsgericht Lörrach - Germany

Subject-matter

• Social policy
  

Provisions of national law referred to

Information not available

Provisions of international law referred to

Information not available

Procedure and result

• Reference for a preliminary ruling
  

Formation of the Court

Grande chambre (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Schintgen

Advocate General

Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer

Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer

Language(s) of the Case

• German
  

Language(s) of the Opinion

• Spanish