O’Brien v Ministry of Justice: ECJ 17 Nov 2011

ECJ (Opnion) Directive 97/81/EC – Framework Agreement on part-time work – Notion of part-time workers who have an employment contract or employment relationship – Part-time judges
Kokott AG said: ‘In this connection, I would also point out that it is difficult to determine how the rights granted by the Framework Agreement in general, and an entitlement to a retirement pension in particular, can jeopardise the essence of the independence of a judge; on the contrary, an entitlement to a retirement pension strengthens the economic independence of judges, and thus also the essence of their independence.
Independence in terms of the essence of an activity is not therefore an appropriate criterion for justifying the exclusion of a professional category form the scope of the Framework Agreement.’
Kokott AG
C-393/10, [2011] EUECJ C-393/10
Directive 97/81/EC
At EATDepartment of Constitutional Affairs v O’Brien EAT 22-Apr-2008
Claim in time and effective date of termination
Extension of time: just and equitable
Appeal against Chair’s exercise of discretion to extend time for a PTWR claim . .
At CAO’Brien v Department for Constitutional Affairs CA 19-Dec-2008
The claimant was a part time recorder. He claimed to be entitled to a judicial pension.
Held: The Employment Appeal Tribunal was wrong to find an error of law in the decision of the Employment Tribunal to extend time; but the court declined to . .
At SCO’Brien v Ministry of Justice SC 28-Jul-2010
The appellant had worked as a part time judge. He now said that he should be entitled to a judicial pension on retirement by means of the Framework Directive. The Regulations disapplied the provisions protecting part time workers for judicial office . .

Cited by:
OpinionO’Brien v Ministry of Justice ECJ 1-Mar-2012
1) European Union law must be interpreted as meaning that it is for the member states to define the concept of ‘workers who have an employment contract or an employment relationship’ in clause 2.1 of the Framework Agreement . . and in particular, to . .
OpinionO’Brien v Ministry of Justice SC 6-Feb-2013
The appellant, a part time recorder challenged his exclusion from pension arrangements.
Held: The appeal was allowed. No objective justification has been shown for departing from the basic principle of remunerating part-timers pro rata . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 March 2021; Ref: scu.448725