CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 4 décembre 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s30870011 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super } .s2D2D36E5 { width:89.6%; border-collapse:collapse } .s4B6BAF08 { width:8.04%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s5F547136 { width:26.38%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s482F300A { width:19.72%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sA72C03B2 { width:20.08%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sE72A2AC3 { width:25.78%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sE5A1B6F2 { width:8.04%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4CBECF56 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:18pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:12pt } .s9B53724B { width:26.38%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2E3B3F22 { width:19.72%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sBD69107B { width:20.08%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF1C834A { width:25.78%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sAB235D59 { width:11.54%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s16BF0367 { width:25.56%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s23BFE0FB { width:17.04%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s37AF4F54 { width:11.54%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s9E7DF94A { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right; font-size:12pt } .s4F78D2EF { width:25.56%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF16BA58 { width:17.04%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top }   Communicated on 4 December 2018   FIFTH SECTION Applications nos. 12693/18 and 14883/18 Melanie ANGERT and others against Germany and Sven RATIH against Germany lodged on 8 March 2018 and 21 March 2018 respectively SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the Uniformity of Collective Agreements Act ( Tarifeinheitsgesetz ), which regulates conflicts that arise if several collective agreements are applicable in one company. The Act prescribes that, in case of a conflict, the collective agreement of the trade union which has fewer members in a company is superseded. The union whose collective agreement is superseded has the right to adopt the collective agreement of the majority union. Moreover, if the employer engages in collective bargaining, it has to inform the other trade unions in the company and all unions have the right to present their demands to the employer. The applicants are all members of a German trade union. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Can the applicants claim to be victims of a violation of the Convention, within the meaning of Article   34?   2.     Has there been an interference with the applicant’s freedom of association, within the meaning of Article   11 §   1 of the Convention?   If so, was that interference prescribed by law and necessary in terms of Article   11 § 2?     Application no 12693/18   No. Firstname LASTNAME Birth year Nationality Representative 1. Melanie ANGERT 1978 German U. Fischer 2. Guido BEHRINGER 1967 German U. Fischer 3. Florian HOFMEIER 1983 German U. Fischer 4. Jens-Peter LÜCK 1968 German U. Fischer 5. Lars WACHSMUTH 1989 German U. Fischer     Application no 14883/18   No. Firstname LASTNAME Birth year Nationality Representative 1. Sven RATIH 1987 German U. Fischer