"CHEZ Razpredelenie Bulgaria" AD v Komisia za zashtita ot diskriminatsia.
| Jurisdiction | European Union |
| Celex Number | 62014CJ0083 |
| ECLI | ECLI:EU:C:2015:480 |
| Docket Number | C-83/14 |
| Court | Court of Justice (European Union) |
| Procedure Type | Reference for a preliminary ruling |
| Date | 16 July 2015 |
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber)
16 July 2015 ( *1 )
‛Directive 2000/43/EC — Principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin — Urban districts lived in mainly by persons of Roma origin — Placing of electricity meters on pylons forming part of the overhead electricity supply network, at a height of between six and seven metres — Concepts of ‘direct discrimination’ and ‘indirect discrimination’ — Burden of proof — Possible justification — Prevention of tampering with electricity meters and of unlawful connections — Proportionality — Widespread nature of the measure — Offensive and stigmatising effect of the measure — Directives 2006/32/EC and 2009/72/EC — Inability of final consumers to monitor their electricity consumption’
In Case C‑83/14,
REQUEST for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the Administrativen sad Sofia-grad (Bulgaria), made by decision of 5 February 2014, received at the Court on 17 February 2014, in the proceedings
CHEZ Razpredelenie Bulgaria AD
v
Komisia za zashtita ot diskriminatsia,
third parties:
Anelia Nikolova,
Darzhavna Komisia za energiyno i vodno regulirane,
THE COURT (Grand Chamber),
composed of K. Lenaerts, Vice-President, acting as President, A. Tizzano, R. Silva de Lapuerta, M. Ilešič, S. Rodin and K. Jürimäe, Presidents of Chambers, A. Rosas, E. Juhász, J. Malenovský, D. Šváby, A. Prechal (Rapporteur), F. Biltgen and C. Lycourgos, Judges,
Advocate General: J. Kokott,
Registrar: C. Strömholm, Administrator,
having regard to the written procedure and further to the hearing on 13 January 2015,
after considering the observations submitted on behalf of:
|
— |
CHEZ Razpredelenie Bulgaria AD, by A. Ganev, V. Bozhilov and A. Dzhingov, lawyers, |
|
— |
Komisia za zashtita ot diskriminatsia, by A. Strashimirova, acting as Agent, |
|
— |
Ms Nikolova, by S. Cox, Barrister, and M. Ferschtman and Y. Grozev, lawyers, |
|
— |
the Bulgarian Government, by E. Petranova and D. Drambozova, acting as Agents, |
|
— |
the European Commission, by D. Martin and D. Roussanov, acting as Agents, |
after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 12 March 2015,
gives the following
Judgment
|
1 |
This request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Article 1 and Article 2(1) and (2)(a) and (b) of Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin (OJ 2000 L 180, p. 22) and of Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’). |
|
2 |
The request has been made in proceedings by which CHEZ Razpredelenie Bulgaria AD (‘CHEZ RB’) seeks the annulment of a decision of the Komisia za zashtita ot dikriminatsia (Commission for Protection against Discrimination; ‘the KZD’) by which it ordered CHEZ RB to bring discrimination against Ms Nikolova to an end and to refrain from discriminatory behaviour of that type in the future. |
Legal context
EU law
|
3 |
Recitals 2, 3, 9, 12, 13, 15, 16 and 28 in the preamble to Directive 2000/43 state:
…
…
…
…
|
|
4 |
As provided in Article 1 of Directive 2000/43, ‘[t]he purpose of this Directive is to lay down a framework for combating discrimination on the grounds of racial or ethnic origin, with a view to putting into effect in the Member States the principle of equal treatment’. |
|
5 |
Article 2 of Directive 2000/43, headed ‘Concept of discrimination’, provides: ‘1. For the purposes of this Directive, the principle of equal treatment shall mean that there shall be no direct or indirect discrimination based on racial or ethnic origin. 2. For the purposes of paragraph 1:
3. Harassment shall be deemed to be discrimination within the meaning of paragraph 1, when an unwanted conduct related to racial or ethnic origin takes place with the purpose or effect of violating the dignity of a person and of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. ... ...’ |
|
6 |
Article 3 of Directive 2000/43, headed ‘Scope’, states in paragraph 1(h): ‘Within the limits of the powers conferred upon the Community, this Directive shall apply to all persons … in relation to: ...
|
|
7 |
Article 6 of Directive 2000/43, headed ‘Minimum requirements’, provides in paragraph 1: ‘Member States may introduce or maintain provisions which are more favourable to the protection of the principle of equal treatment than those laid down in this Directive.’ |
|
8 |
Article 8 of Directive 2000/43, headed ‘Burden of proof’, provides in paragraph 1: ‘Member States shall take such measures as are necessary, in accordance with their national judicial systems, to ensure that, when persons who consider themselves wronged because the principle of equal treatment has not been applied to them establish, before a court or other competent authority, facts from which it may be presumed that there has been direct or indirect discrimination, it shall be for the respondent to prove that there has been no breach of the principle of equal treatment.’ |
|
9 |
Recital 29 in the preamble to Directive 2006/32/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2006 on energy end-use efficiency and energy services and repealing Council Directive 93/76/EEC (OJ 2006 L 114, p. 64) stated: ‘In order to enable final consumers to make better-informed decisions as regards their individual energy consumption, they should be provided with a reasonable amount of information thereon and with other relevant information ... In addition, consumers should be actively... |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Cresco Investigation GmbH v Markus Achatzi.
...the national legislation which makes the distinction at issue (see, to that effect, judgments of 16 July 2015, CHEZ Razpredelenie Bulgaria, C‑83/14, EU:C:2015:480, paragraph 89, and of 26 June 2018, MB (Change of gender and retirement pension), C‑451/16, EU:C:2018:492, paragraph 43 It must ......
-
Opinion of Advocate General Bobek delivered on 9 July 2020.
...der vorliegenden Schlussanträge neutral als „zusätzlichen Urlaub“. 7 Vgl. z. B. Urteil vom 16. Juli 2015, CHEZ Razpredelenie Bulgaria (C‑83/14, EU:C:2015:480, Rn. 62 und die dort angeführte 8 Vgl. in ähnlichem Zusammenhang und im Hinblick auf die Einordnung von Elternurlaub als „Arbeitsbedi......
-
P.M. v S. Snc.
...criterion or practice in question, who are disadvantaged (see, by analogy, judgments of 16 July 2015, CHEZ Razpredelenie Bulgaria, C‑83/14, EU:C:2015:480, paragraphs 99 and 100, and of 15 November 2018, Maniero, C‑457/17, EU:C:2018:912, paragraph 47 and the case-law 42 Accordingly, the exis......
-
Opinion of Advocate General Richard de la Tour delivered on 13 February 2025.
...EU:C:2008:61, paragrafi 4, 5 e 20, nonché nota 5). 35 V. conclusioni dell’avvocata generale Kokott nella causa CHEZ Razpredelenie Bulgaria (C-83/14, EU:C:2015:170, paragrafo 36 V. paragrafo 19 delle presenti conclusioni. 37 Per quanto riguarda i suoi effetti in materia di prestazione social......
-
Equidad y principio de no discriminación en el pilar social europeo
...Law , C-303/, C:2008:415. 32 Sentencia de 16 de julio de 2015, CHEZ Razpredelenie Bulgaria AD contra Komisia za zashtita ot diskriminatsia, C- 83/14, C:2015:480. 66 NATALIA CAICEDO CAMACHO proteger, no puede definirse de manera restrictiva. En consecuencia, una interpretación amplia de la D......
-
Métodos «clásicos» de interpretación
...95/46/CE (Reglamento general de protección de datos) ( DO 2016, L 119, p. 1). Véase también CHEZ Razpredelenie Bulgaria (C-83/14, EU:C:2015:480), apartados 55 y 56. 263 Uno de los ejemplos más conocidos de este tipo de interpretación teleológica es la sentencia Costa/ENEL ( supra nota 33), ......
-
Interpretación de la carta de los derechos fundamentales de la Unión Europea
...Véanse, en este sentido, Tempelman y van Schaijk (C-96/03 y C-97/03, EU:C:2005:145), apartado 47; CHEZ Razpredelenie Bulgaria (C-83/14, EU:C:2015:480), apartado 123; N . ( supra nota 157), apartado 54, y F. (C-473/16, EU:C:2018:36), apartado 56. 622 Véanse las conclusiones de la Abogada Gen......
-
The definition of discrimination
...Case C-303/06, Coleman v. Attri dge Law and Steve Law . 57 Therefore, the wording should also be interpreted as has been established by Case C 83/14, CHEZ Razpredelenie Bul gar ia AD v. Komisia za zashtita ot diskriminatsia , such that a person can suffer discrimination together with a cert......