EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62017CN0018

Case C-18/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 16 January 2017 — Danieli & C. Officine Meccaniche SpA and Others v Arbeitsmarktservice Leoben

OJ C 144, 8.5.2017, p. 18–19 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

8.5.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 144/18


Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 16 January 2017 — Danieli & C. Officine Meccaniche SpA and Others v Arbeitsmarktservice Leoben

(Case C-18/17)

(2017/C 144/24)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Danieli & C. Officine Meccaniche SpA, Dragan Panic, Ivan Arnautov, Jakov Mandic, Miroslav Brnjac, Nikolai Dorassevitch, Alen Mihovic

Defendant: Arbeitsmarktservice Leoben

Questions referred

1.

Are Articles 56 and 57 TFEU, Directive 96/71/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services, Paragraph 2 and Paragraph 12 of Chapter 2, Free movement of persons, of Annex V to the Act concerning the conditions of accession of the Republic of Croatia and the adjustments to the Treaty on European Union, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, to be interpreted as meaning that Austria is entitled to restrict the posting of workers employed in an undertaking established in Croatia by requiring a work permit, where this posting takes place by means of transfer to a company established in Italy [Or. 2] so that the Italian company can provide a service in Austria, and the work carried out by the Croatian workers for the Italian company on the construction of a wire rod mill in Austria is restricted to providing this service in Austria and there is no employment relationship between them and the Italian company?

2.

Are Articles 56 and 57 TFEU and Directive 96/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services to be interpreted as meaning that Austria is entitled to restrict the posting of Russian and Belarusian workers employed in a company established in Italy by requiring a work permit, if this posting takes place by means of transfer to a second company established in Italy for the purpose of the provision by the second company of a service in Austria, and the work of the Russian and/or Belarusian workers for the second company is restricted to providing its service in Austria and there is no employment relationship between them and the second company?


(1)  OJ L 18, 21.1.1997, p. 1.


Top