Ulla-Brith Andersson y Susannne Wåkerås-Andersson contra Svenska staten (Estado sueco).

JurisdictionEuropean Union
Celex Number61997CJ0321
ECLIECLI:EU:C:1999:307
Docket NumberC-321/97
Date15 June 1999
CourtCourt of Justice (European Union)
Procedure TypeReference for a preliminary ruling
EUR-Lex - 61997J0321 - EN 61997J0321

Judgment of the Court of 15 June 1999. - Ulla-Brith Andersson and Susannne Wåkerås-Andersson v Svenska staten (Swedish State). - Reference for a preliminary ruling: Stockholms tingsrätt - Sweden. - Article 234 EC (ex-Article 177) - EEA Agreement - Jurisdiction of the Court of Justice - Accession to the European Union - Directive 80/987/EEC - Liability of a State. - Case C-321/97.

European Court reports 1999 Page I-03551


Summary
Parties
Grounds
Decision on costs
Operative part

Keywords

1 Preliminary rulings - Jurisdiction of the Court - Limits - Interpretation of the Agreement on the European Economic Area as regards its application in the States belonging to the European Free Trade Association - Not covered

(EC Treaty, Art. 177 (now Art. 234 EC); EEA Agreement)

2 Social policy - Approximation of laws - Protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer - Directive 80/987 - Insufficiently transposed into national law in a new Member State by the date of accession - Whether individuals may rely on the Directive or on attribution of liability to the State in relation to events prior to the date of accession - Not possible

(Council Directive 80/987)

Summary

1 Although the Court has jurisdiction in principle to give preliminary rulings concerning the interpretation of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA) when a question arises before one of the national courts, since the provisions of that Agreement form an integral part of the Community legal system, that jurisdiction applies solely with regard to the Community, so that the Court has no jurisdiction to rule on the interpretation of the EEA Agreement as regards its application in the States belonging to the European Free Trade Association (EFTA).

The fact that the EFTA State in question subsequently became a Member State of the European Union, so that the question emanates from a court or tribunal of one of the Member States, cannot have the effect of attributing to the Court of Justice jurisdiction to interpret the EEA Agreement as regards its application to situations which do not come within the Community legal order. Thus, although the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice covers the interpretation of Community law, of which the EEA Agreement forms an integral part, as regards its application in the new Member States with effect from the date of their accession, the Court has no jurisdiction to rule on the effects of that Agreement within the national legal systems of the contracting States during the period prior to accession.

2 Community law does not entail that, upon the accession to the European Union of an EFTA State, individuals may rely before the courts or tribunals of that State, as of the date of entry into force of Directive 80/987 concerning the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer, on rights derived directly therefrom, or on attribution of liability to that State for damage caused to them by failure to transpose Directive 80/987 correctly, where the events which give rise to the operation of the guarantee provided for in the Directive occurred prior to the date of accession.

Parties

In Case C-321/97,

REFERENCE to the Court under Article 177 of the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) by the Stockholms Tingsrätten, Sweden, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between

Ulla-Brith Andersson and Susanne Wåkerås-Andersson

and

Svenska Staten (Swedish State)

on the interpretation of Article 6 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area signed on 2 May 1992 and approved by Decision 94/1/EC, ECSC of the Council and the Commission of 13 December 1993 on the conclusion of the Agreement on the European Economic Area between the European Communities, their Member States and the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland, the Republic of Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein, the Kingdom of Norway and the Kingdom of Sweden (OJ 1994 L 1, p. 1), and Council Directive 80/987/EEC of 20 October 1980 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer (OJ 1980 L 283, p. 23),

THE COURT,

composed of: G.C. Rodríguez Iglesias, President, J.-P. Puissochet, G. Hirsch and P. Jann (Presidents of Chambers), J.C. Moitinho de Almeida, C. Gulmann, J.L. Murray, D.A.O. Edward, H. Ragnemalm, L. Sevón (Rapporteur) and M. Wathelet, Judges,

Advocate General: G. Cosmas,

Registrar: H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar,

after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:

- Svenska Staten (the Swedish State), by Hans Regner, Justitiekansler, acting as Agent, assisted by Gun Löfgren Cederberg, Advokat, Stockholm,

- the Swedish Government, by Lotty Nordling, Rättschef in the Legal Secretariat (EU) at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, acting as Agent,

- the French Government, by Kareen Rispal-Bellanger, Deputy Director for International Economic Law and Community Law in the Legal Affairs Directorate of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Claude Chavance, Foreign Affairs Secretary in that Directorate, acting as Agents,

- the Norwegian Government, by Jan Bugge-Mahrt, Deputy Director-General in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, acting as Agent,

- the Commission of the European Communities, by John Forman and Christina Tufvesson, Legal Advisers, acting as Agents,

having regard to the Report for the Hearing,

after hearing the oral observations of Ulla-Brith Andersson and Susanne Wåkerås-Andersson, represented by Allan Stutzinsky, Advokat, Göteborg; of the Svenska Staten (the Swedish State), represented by Hans Regner; of the Swedish Government, represented by Lotty Nordling; of the French Government, represented by Claude Chavance; of the Icelandic Government, represented by Martin Eyjólfsson, Legal Adviser at the Icelandic Mission to the European Union, acting as Agent; of the Norwegian Government, represented by Jan Bugge-Mahrt; and of the Commission, represented by John Forman and Christina Tufvesson, at the hearing on 11 November 1998,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 19 January 1999,

gives the following

Judgment

Grounds

1 By order of 15 September 1997, which was received at the Court Registry on 17 September 1997, the Stockholms Tingsrätten [District Court] referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling under Article 177 of the EC Treaty (now Article...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex
30 cases
  • Irène Bogiatzi, married name Ventouras v Deutscher Luftpool and Others.
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 25 June 2009
    ...las sentencias de 30 de abril de 1974, Haegeman (181/73, Rec. p. 449), apartado 5; de 15 de junio de 1999, Andersson y Wåkerås-Andersson (C‑321/97, Rec. p. I‑3551), apartado 26, y de 11 de septiembre de 2007, Merck Genéricos – Produtos Farmacêuticos (C‑431/05, Rec. p. I‑7001), apartado 31. ......
  • Ynos kft v János Varga.
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 22 September 2005
    ...sur ce point, la position exprimée par la Cour dans une affaire analogue, dans l'arrêt du 15 juin 1999, Andersson et Wåkerås-Andersson (C‑321/97, Rec. p. I‑3551, point 3). 12 – Voir arrêts Dzodzi, précité; du 8 novembre 1990, Gmurzynska-Bscher (C-231/89, Rec. p. I‑4003); du 25 juin 1992, Fe......
  • European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium.
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 21 July 2011
    ...presentadas en el asunto Ospelt y Schlössle Weisenberg, citadas en la nota 4, punto 65, y sentencia de 15 de junio de 1999, Andersson (C‑321/97, Rec. p. I‑3551), apartado 28. 7 – Sentencia Comisión/Portugal, citada en la nota 3, apartado 41. 8 – Conclusiones presentadas en el asunto Ospelt ......
  • European Commission v European Food SA and Others.
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 25 January 2022
    ...entfalte. 101 Aus der Rechtsprechung des Gerichtshofs, insbesondere aus den Urteilen vom 15. Juni 1999, Andersson und Wåkerås-Andersson (C‑321/97, EU:C:1999:307, Rn. 31), sowie vom 10. Januar 2006, Ynos (C‑302/04, EU:C:2006:9, Rn. 36), ergebe sich, dass das Unionsrecht, insbesondere die Art......
  • Get Started for Free
1 provisions