ECLI:EU:C:2024:1060

Texto completo

ORDER OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber)

19 December 2024 ( *1 )

(Rectification of judgment)

In Joined Cases C‑541/20 REC to C‑555/20 REC,

ACTIONS for annulment under Article 263 TFEU, brought on 23 October 2020, (Cases C‑541/20 to C‑550/20 and C‑552/20) and on 26 October 2020 (Cases C‑551/20 and C‑553/20 to C‑555/20),

Republic of Lithuania, represented by K. Dieninis, R. Dzikovič and V. Kazlauskaitė-Švenčionienė, acting as Agents, and by R. Petravičius, advokatas, A. Kisieliauskaitė and G. Taluntytė (C‑541/20 and C‑542/20),

Republic of Bulgaria, represented initially by M. Georgieva, T. Mitova and L. Zaharieva, and subsequently by T. Mitova and L. Zaharieva, acting as Agents (C‑543/20 to C‑545/20),

Romania, represented by R. Antonie, L.-E. Baţagoi, M. Chicu, E. Gane, R.‑I. Haţieganu, L. Liţu and A. Rotăreanu, acting as Agents (C‑546/20 to C‑548/20),

Republic of Cyprus, represented by I. Neophytou, acting as Agent (C‑549/20 and C‑550/20),

Hungary, represented by M.Z. Fehér and K. Szíjjártó, acting as Agents (C‑551/20),

Republic of Malta, represented by A. Buhagiar, acting as Agent, and by D. Sarmiento Ramírez-Escudero and J. Sedano Lorenzo, abogados (C‑552/20),

Republic of Poland, represented by B. Majczyna, M. Horoszko, D. Krawczyk and D. Lutostańska, acting as Agents (C‑553/20 to C‑555/20),

applicants,

supported by:

Kingdom of Belgium, represented initially by S. Baeyens, P. Cottin, L. Delmotte and J.-C. Halleux, C. Pochet and B. Van Hyfte, and subsequently by S. Baeyens, P. Cottin, L. Delmotte, C. Pochet and B. Van Hyfte, acting as Agents (C‑552/20),

Republic of Estonia, represented initially by N. Grünberg and M. Kriisa, and subsequently by M. Kriisa, acting as Agents (C‑541/20, C‑542/20, C‑544/20, C‑545/20, C‑547/20 to C‑552/20, C‑554/20 and C‑555/20),

Republic of Latvia, represented initially by K. Pommere, I. Romanovska and V. Soņeca, and subsequently by J. Davidoviča, K. Pommere and I. Romanovska, acting as Agents (C‑541/20 to C‑555/20),

Romania, represented by R. Antonie, L.-E. Baţagoi, M. Chicu E. Gane, R.‑I. Haţieganu, L. Liţu and A. Rotăreanu, acting as Agents (C‑541/20 to C‑545/20 and C‑549/20 to C‑555/20),

interveners,

European Parliament, represented initially by I. Anagnostopoulou, O. Denkov, C. Ionescu-Dima, A. Tamás and S. Toliušis, and subsequently by I. Anagnostopoulou, O. Denkov, C. Ionescu-Dima, W.D. Kuzmienko, B.D. Simon, S. Toliušis and R. van de Westelaken, acting as Agents,

defendant,

supported by:

Kingdom of Denmark, represented initially by J. Nymann-Lindegren, M. Søndahl Wolff and L. Teilgård, and subsequently by V. Pasternak Jørgensen, M. Søndahl Wolff and L. Teilgård, and subsequently by V. Pasternak Jørgensen and M. Søndahl Wolff, and finally by C. Maertens and M. Søndahl Wolff, acting as Agents (C‑541/20 to C‑555/20),

Federal Republic of Germany, represented initially by J. Möller and D. Klebs, and subsequently by J. Möller, acting as Agents (C‑541/20 to C‑555/20),

Hellenic Republic (C‑542/20, C‑543/20, C‑545/20 to C‑547/20 and C‑551/20),

French Republic, represented initially by A.-L. Desjonquères, A. Ferrand and N. Vincent, and subsequently by A.-L. Desjonquères and N. Vincent, and subsequently by R. Bénard, J.-L. Carré, V. Depenne, A.-L. Desjonquères and B. Herbaut, and finally by R. Bénard, M. Guiresse, B. Herbaut and B. Travard, acting as Agents (C‑541/20 à C‑555/20),

Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, represented initially by A. Germeaux and T. Uri, and subsequently by A. Germeaux, acting as Agents (C‑541/20 to C‑555/20),

Kingdom of the Netherlands, represented by M.K. Bulterman and J. Langer, acting as Agents (C‑541/20 to C‑555/20),

Republic of Austria, represented by A. Posch and J. Schmoll, acting as Agents (C‑541/20 to C‑555/20),

Kingdom of Sweden, represented initially by H. Eklinder, J. Lundberg, C. Meyer-Seitz, A. Runeskjöld, M. Salborn Hodgson, R. Shahsavan Eriksson, H. Shev and O. Simonsson, and subsequently by H. Eklinder, C. Meyer-Seitz, A. Runeskjöld, M. Salborn Hodgson, R. Shahsavan Eriksson, H. Shev and O. Simonsson, acting as Agents (C‑541/20 to C‑555/20),

interveners,

and

Council of the European Union, represented by M. Bencze, I. Gurov, A. Norberg, K. Pavlaki, V. Sanda, A. Sikora-Kalėda, A. Vârnav and L. Vétillard, acting as Agents,

defendant,

supported by:

Federal Republic of Germany, represented initially by J. Möller and D. Klebs, and subsequently by J. Möller, acting as Agents (C‑541/20 to C‑555/20),

Hellenic Republic (C‑542/20, C‑543/20, C‑545/20 to C‑547/20 and C‑551/20),

Italian Republic, represented by G. Palmieri, acting as Agent, and subsequently by S. Fiorentino, acting as Agent, and by A. Lipari and G. Santini, avvocati dello Stato (C‑541/20 to C‑555/20),

Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, represented initially by A. Germeaux and T. Uri, and subsequently by A. Germeaux, acting as Agents (C‑541/20 to C‑555/20),

Kingdom of the Netherlands, represented by M.K. Bulterman and J. Langer, acting as Agents (C‑541/20 to C‑555/20),

Republic of Austria, represented by A. Posch and J. Schmoll, acting as Agents (C‑541/20 to C‑555/20),

interveners,

THE COURT (Grand Chamber)

composed of K. Lenaerts, President, T. von Danwitz, Vice-President, F. Biltgen, M.L. Arastey Sahún, S. Rodin, A. Kumin, D. Gratsias and M. Gavalec, Presidents of Chambers, E. Regan (Rapporteur), I. Ziemele and J. Passer, Judges,

Advocate General: A. Biondi,

Registrar: A. Calot Escobar,

after hearing the Advocate General,

makes the following

Order

1	On 4 October 2024, the Court (Grand Chamber) delivered the judgment in Lithuania and Others v Parliament and Council (Mobility package) (C‑541/20 to C‑555/20, EU:C:2024:818).

2	That judgment contains, in the versions in the languages of the case, errors that it is appropriate for the Court to rectify of its own motion or at the request of Romania, pursuant to Article 103(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice.

On those grounds, the Court (Grand Chamber) hereby orders:

In the introductory part of the judgment of 4 October 2024, Lithuania and Othersv Parliament and Council (Mobility package) (C‑541/20 to C‑555/20, EU:C:2024:818), the reference to the subject matter of the actions shall be rectified as follows:

‘ACTIONS for annulment under Article 263 TFEU, brought on 23 October 2020 (Cases C‑541/20 to C‑550/20 and C‑552/20) and on 26 October 2020 (Cases C‑551/20 and C‑553/20 to C‑555/20).’

Paragraph 174 of the English-language version of the judgment shall be rectified as follows:

‘It must be borne in mind that, since the worker must be regarded as the weaker party in the employment relationship, it is necessary to prevent the employer from being in a position to impose on him or her a restriction of his or her rights or from dissuading the worker from explicitly claiming his or her rights vis-à-vis his or her employer (see, to that effect, judgment of 14 May 2019, CCOO, C‑55/18, EU:C:2019:402, paragraphs 44 and 45 and the case-law cited).’

Paragraph 544 of the judgment shall be rectified as follows:

‘In that regard, Romania adds that the fact that the Member States develop parking and accommodation infrastructures differently and that they also differ from one another depending on whether they are located on the periphery of the European Union or close to the centre of EU road transport makes the intervention of the EU legislature all the more disproportionate. Given that the network of parking areas is underdeveloped in the Member States of transit, the obligation laid down in point 6(c) of Article 1 of Regulation 2020/1054 primarily affects transport undertakings established in Member States on the periphery of the European Union.’

Paragraph 1204 of the judgment shall be rectified as follows:

‘In that regard, it should be noted, however, in so far as, first, Romania seeks the annulment of Article 1(5) of Directive 2020/1057, that that Member State merely claims, in general terms, that Member States situated on the ‘periphery of the European Union’ suffer indirect discrimination as a result of the contested provisions of Article 1, without explaining how paragraph 5 could cause disadvantages for those Member States, even though that provision grants the carrier responsible for an operation transiting through the territory of a Member State the benefit of an exemption from the rules on posting where the conditions laid down therein are satisfied. Such an exemption is such as to limit the impact of the greater or lesser distance between the Member State in which the haulier is established and another Member State where the loading or unloading of goods, or the picking up or setting down of passengers, takes place, with regard to the question whether the road transport operation in question is subject to the rules on the posting of workers laid down in Directive 96/71.’

5.	The original of the present order shall be annexed to the original of the rectified judgment. A note of this order shall be made in the margin of the original of the rectified judgment.

Luxembourg, 19 December 2024.

A. Calot Escobar

Registrar

K. Lenaerts

President

( *1 ) Languages of the case: Bulgarian, Greek, English, Lithuanian, Hungarian, Polish and Romanian.

Rectification order of 19 December 2024.#Republic of Lithuania and Others v European Parliament and Council of the European Union.#Rectification of judgment.#Joined Cases C-541/20 to C-555/20.

Texto completo

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude