2020/37 Can the exception clause of Article 8 Rome I save a Turkish airline company from the application of Dutch dismissal law in a dispute with an Amsterdam home-based co-pilot? (NL)

The central question in this case was what was the objectively applicable law to an employment contract concluded between a Turkish airline and a Dutch co-pilot, in accordance with Article 8 Rome I. The ruling is particularly interesting for the relation between the habitual place of work and the exception clause and points to the elements that should be taken into account.

2020/31 Comparing job descriptions is insufficient for checking whether work is equally valuable (BG)

The Bulgarian Supreme Administrative Court in a decision of 24 June 2019 has ruled that the mere comparison between the job descriptions of employees is not sufficient basis for establishing whether the employees are carrying out the same work or work of equal value and the courts should also take into consideration the practical aspects of the work, the specific working conditions and the tasks actually carried out.

2020/31 Comparing job descriptions is insufficient for checking whether work is equally valuable (BG)

The Bulgarian Supreme Administrative Court in a decision of 24 June 2019 has ruled that the mere comparison between the job descriptions of employees is not sufficient basis for establishing whether the employees are carrying out the same work or work of equal value and the courts should also take into consideration the practical aspects of the work, the specific working conditions and the tasks actually carried out.

2020/43 ECJ clarifies ‘worker’ status under EU law in gig economy ruling (UK)

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled that, while it is for national courts to make decisions about employment status, a courier working for Yodel in the UK appeared to have been correctly classified as self-employed, given the latitude he had over accepting jobs, working for competitors, providing substitutes and deciding his work schedule. The crucial factors were independence and subordination.

ECtHR 20 October 2020, application no. 33139/13 (Napotnik - v - Romania), Gender Discrimination

Ms Oana-Cornelia Napotnik - v - Romania

ECtHR 20 October 2020, application no. 33139/13 (Napotnik - v - Romania), Gender Discrimination

Ms Oana-Cornelia Napotnik - v - Romania

2020/43 ECJ clarifies ‘worker’ status under EU law in gig economy ruling (UK)

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled that, while it is for national courts to make decisions about employment status, a courier working for Yodel in the UK appeared to have been correctly classified as self-employed, given the latitude he had over accepting jobs, working for competitors, providing substitutes and deciding his work schedule. The crucial factors were independence and subordination.

Academic Board Insight: Human rights due diligence

ECJ 6 October 2020, Case C-181/19 (Job Center Krefeld), Social Insurance

Jobcenter Krefeld – Widerspruchsstelle – v – NK AG, Austrian case

ECJ 6 October 2020, Case C-181/19 (Job Center Krefeld), Social Insurance

Jobcenter Krefeld – Widerspruchsstelle – v – NK AG, Austrian case