You are on page 1of 1

C 258/10 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 15.8.

98

Community and the Socialist Federal Republic of JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
Yugoslavia.
(Sixth Chamber)
( ) OJ C 197 of 6.7.1996.
1
of 17 June 1998

in Case C-243/95 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Labour Court): Kathleen Hill and Ann Stapleton v the
Revenue Commissioners and Department of Finance (1)

(Equal treatment of men and women Ð National civil
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT servants Ð Job-sharing scheme Ð Incremental credit
of 16 June 1998 determined on the basis of the criterion of actual time
worked Ð Indirect discrimination)
in Case C-226/97 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Arrondissementsrechtbank te Maastricht): criminal (98/C 258/18)
proceedings against Johannes Martinus Lemmens (1)
(Directive 83/189/EEC Ð Procedure for the provision of
information in the field of technical standards and
regulations Ð Direct effect of the Directive) (Language of the case: English)
(98/C 258/17)

(Language of the case: Dutch) In Case C-243/95: reference to the Court under Article 177
of the EC Treaty by the Labour Court (Ireland) for a
preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be tribunal between Kathleen Hill and Ann Stapleton and the
published in the European Court Reports) Revenue Commissioners, Department of Finance Ð on the
interpretation of Council Directive 75/117/EEC of
10 February 1975 on the approximation of the laws of the
In Case C-226/97: reference to the Court under Article 177 Member States relating to the application of the principle
of the EC Treaty from the Arrondissementsrechtbank of equal pay for men and women (OJ L 45 of 19.2.1975,
(District Court) Maastricht (Netherlands) for a p. 19) Ð the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: H.
preliminary ruling in the criminal proceedings before that Ragnemalm, President of the Chamber, R. Schintgen, G. F.
Court against Johannes Martinus Lemmens Ð on the Mancini, J. L. Murray (Rapporteur) and G. Hirsch,
interpretation of Council Directive 83/189/EEC of Judges; A. La Pergola, Advocate General; L. Hewlett,
28 March 1983 laying down a procedure for the provision Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
of information in the field of technical standards and 17 June 1998, in which it has ruled:
regulations (OJ L 109 of 26.4.1983, p. 8) Ð the Court,
composed of: C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), President of the
Third and Fifth Chambers, acting for the President, G. F.
Mancini, P. J. G. Kapteyn, J. L. Murray, D. A. O. Edward,
Article 119 of the EC Treaty and Council Directive 75/
J.-P. Puissochet, P. Jann and L. Sevón, Judges; N. Fennelly,
117/EEC of 10 February 1975 on the approximation of
Advocate General; D. Louterman-Hubeau, Principal
the laws of the Member States relating to the application
Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
of the principle of equal pay for men and women are to
16 June 1998, in which it has ruled:
be interpreted as precluding legislation which provides
that, where a much higher percentage of female workers
than male workers are engaged in job-sharing, job-sharers
Council Directive 83/189/EEC of 28 March 1983 laying
who convert to full-time employment are given a point on
down a procedure for the provision of information in the
the pay scale applicable to full-time staff which is lower
field of technical standards and regulations is to be
than that which those workers previously occupied on the
interpreted as meaning that breach of the obligation
pay scale applicable to job-sharing staff due to the fact
imposed by Article 8 thereof to notify a technical
that the employer has applied the criterion of service
regulation on breath-analysis apparatus does not have the
calculated by the actual length of time worked in a post,
effect of making it impossible for evidence obtained by
unless such legislation can be justified by objective criteria
means of such apparatus, authorised in accordance with
unrelated to any discrimination on grounds of sex.
regulations which have not been notified, to be relied
upon against an individual charged with driving while
under the influence of alcohol.
(1) OJ C 229 of 2.9.1995.

(1) OJ C 228 of 26.7.1997.