News

This week, we will discuss a somewhat exotic topic. While it is not directly related to traffic law, it is nevertheless cross-border and primarily concerns cars, albeit in the context of labour law. The ECJ recently issued a preliminary ruling on working hours in response to a request from Spain. On 9 October 2025, the Court of Justice ruled on the matter (case number C-110/24).
In this case, employees were required to drive from their homes to designated bases. From there, they would then continue on to their intended place of work. Vehicles with the necessary equipment were provided for these journeys. The return journey works in the opposite direction: place of work, base, home. All of this should take place between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., with the exception of departing from and arriving at home. However, according to the employer, this journey does not constitute working time and is therefore not paid, contrary to the ECJ's opinion. The ECJ bases its ruling on the Working Time Directive, specifically Article 2. Article 2 sets out the definitions used in the Directive. In this case, definition 1 is especially relevant:

'Working time: any period during which a worker, in accordance with national legislation and/or practice, is at the employer's disposal and carrying out their activity or duties'.

As is customary in law, the European legislator subsumes the facts under the relevant conditions provided for in the legal provision.
In this case, there are three conditions: ‘be available’, ‘perform activities’ and ‘work’.

The ECJ ruled that, in this instance, the employees were subject solely to their employer's instructions, with the employer determining all conditions, including travel to and from work and means of transport. The employees had no room for manoeuvre, which is an important distinguishing criterion. They were therefore 'at the employer's disposal' at all times and 'carried out their work during this time'.

Regarding the last criterion, the ECJ has previously ruled that there is a presumption that an employee is working while driving (judgment of 10 September 2015 – C-266/14). It is particularly important that, as in this case, the journeys are inextricably linked to the employees' work because they do not have a fixed place of work. Work cannot be measured solely by where employees are physically present.

The decision has attracted criticism and divided opinion. Some do not attach much importance to it, while others reject the stress theory developed by the Federal Labour Court too lightly.
However, the ECJ disagrees with the Federal Labour Court on this point, stating that the Working Time Directive only recognises working time and rest periods, not anything in between. This is also clear from the definitions.
The ECJ prefers to take an overall view of all the circumstances. In the case of Spain, for example, driving time was classified as working time. However, the ECJ does not make a general statement on this.

Source: Pixabay/AI-generated image 8670956_1280