Mangold v Helm (Case C-144/04) [2005] ECR I-9981

Facts

• Mr. Mangold, a 56-year-old German lawyer, was employed under a fixed-term employment contract.
• German legislation permitted fixed-term contracts for workers over 52 years old, purportedly to encourage employment of older persons.
• Mr. Mangold challenged this law as constituting age discrimination, contrary to the principle of equal treatment under EU law.
• At the time, Directive 2000/78/EC on equal treatment in employment and occupation had not been fully implemented in Germany.
• The case was referred to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) for a preliminary ruling on the compatibility of the national law with EU principles.

Issues

1. Whether the German legislation allowing fixed-term contracts solely for workers over a certain age constituted unlawful age discrimination under EU law.
2. Whether the general principle of non-discrimination on grounds of age had direct effect prior to full implementation of Directive 2000/78/EC.
3. Whether national courts were obliged to disapply national provisions in conflict with the general principle of non-discrimination on grounds of age.

Decision

• The ECJ found that the German law was incompatible with the general principle of non-discrimination on grounds of age.
• The Court held that this general principle forms part of the Community legal order and possesses direct effect, even if not expressly implemented by a directive.
• The Court cited Article 6(2) TEU and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU as sources confirming the prohibition of age discrimination.
• National courts were found obliged to set aside provisions of national law that conflicted with the general principle of non-discrimination on grounds of age.

Legal Principles

• The general principle of non-discrimination on grounds of age is binding within EU law, regardless of the status of directive implementation.
• This principle has direct effect, permitting individuals to rely on it before national courts.
• National law that conflicts with general principles of EU law, such as non-discrimination, must be disapplied by domestic courts.
• Article 6(2) TEU and the Charter of Fundamental Rights were instrumental in confirming these fundamental rights protections.

Conclusion

The ECJ’s judgment in Mangold v Helm established that the general principle of non-discrimination on the grounds of age is directly effective and takes precedence over conflicting national law, reinforcing the central importance of fundamental rights within the EU legal order.