On June 19th, 2025, the Court of Justice of the European Union issued its judgment in Case C-419/24, providing clarification regarding the principal purpose of Directive 98/59/EC concerning collective redundancies. The Court reaffirmed that each Member State retains the authority to establish provisions that are more advantageous to workers. Directive 98/59/EC sets EU rules on collective redundancies, setting out common principles for Member States to harmonise national law provisions on the matter, and aims to protect workers by mandating information and consultation with trade unions during workforce reductions. In Case C-419/24 (June 19, 2025), the Court of Justice of the EU confirmed that the Directive’s main goal is to require information, consultation with worker representatives, and notification of authorities before collective redundancies. The case stems from a dispute arising from a collective dismissal ordered by a French company operating in the hotel sector and from an employee’s challenge to the employer’s decision. The plaintiff-initiated proceedings in the Court of Nice, seeking to have the dismissal declared null and void. The basis for this claim was the company's omission of service provider personnel, alongside its own staff, from the calculation of employees subject to redundancy. Furthermore, the company failed to establish an employment protection plan as required. French law requires that employees from external companies who have worked for a user company for over a year count toward the workforce in collective dismissals. If a company with fifty or more employees dismisses at least ten workers without an employment protection plan, the dismissal is invalid. The French Supreme Court stayed the proceedings, asking the Court of Justice whether, under Directive 98/59/EC, the workers of the external company should be considered employees of the user company and thus considered towards the threshold set out in the French law to trigger the application of the rules governing collective dismissal procedures. The CJEU preliminarily declared that it lacked jurisdiction to rule on the preliminary question, specifying that Directive 98/59/EC is applicable in a case such as the one described. The Court also pointed out that EU laws only partially unify the rules for protecting workers during collective layoffs, noting that the relevant Directive allows Member States the freedom to implement more worker-friendly regulations if they choose. European legislation does not set strict rules for calculating employee thresholds in collective dismissals, leaving this to national laws. It also does not require employment protection plans. The judgment, therefore, does not rule on the merits of the case but clarifies the scope of application and objectives of Directive 98/59/EC on collective redundancies.
2026 - Morri Rossetti
