Reference for a preliminary ruling – Social policy – Directive 97/81/EC – Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC – Clause 4 – Principle of non-discrimination – Part-time workers – Retirement pension – Calculation of the amount of the pension – Account taken of years of service completed before expiry of the period for transposition of Directive 97/81/EC – Immediate application to the future effects of a situation which arose under the old law
periods of service prior to the deadline for transposing the directive must be taken into account for the purpose of calculating the retirement pension entitlement. As the court explained, while a new legal rule does not apply to legal situations that ‘arose and became definitive’ prior to its entry into force, it does apply to ‘the future effects of a situation which arose under the old law’. It was accordingly necessary to examine whether – ‘the gradual acquisition of pension entitlements over the period preceding the deadline [for transposition of the directive] has the effect that the legal situation of the claimant must be considered to have become definitive at that date.’
It noted the argument for the government that at the end of each period of service the corresponding pension entitlement ‘exhausts its effects’, and therefore should be left out of account (para 30). However, (in a passage relied on by both parties in the present appeal) the court observed:
‘with regard to the argument of the United Kingdom Government that the calculation of the period of service required to qualify for a retirement pension should be distinguished from the rights to a pension, it must be noted that it cannot be concluded from the fact that a right to a pension is definitively acquired at the end of a corresponding period of service that the legal situation of the worker must be considered definitive. It should be noted in this respect that it is only subsequently and by taking into account relevant periods of service that the worker can effectively avail himself of that right with a view to payment of his retirement pension.’
Judges:
R Silva De Lapuerta, Vice President
Citations:
[2019] 1 CMLR 40, [2019] IRLR 185, [2019] Pens LR 7, ECLI:EU:C:2018:879, [2019] ICR 505, [2018] WLR(D) 685
Links:
Jurisdiction:
European
Cited by:
At ECJ – Miller and Others v Ministry of Justice SC 16-Dec-2019
‘The issue in this appeal is when time starts to run for a claim by a part-time judge to a pension under the Part-time Workers’ Directive (Directive 97/81) (‘PTWD’), as applied by the Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.677843