Report 2011 - EFTA Court

deemed to fall within the scope of Article 3(1)(c) of the PWD.
According to the Kingdom of Norway, since the level of protection
concerning the matters referred to in Article 3(1)(a)–(g) of the
PWD has been harmonised at Community level by the Directive, 67
any national measure relating thereto must be assessed in the
light of the provisions of the Directive, and not Article 36 EEA. 68
The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union
163. The Kingdom of Norway agrees with ESA that the Court need
not address the Charter in the present case. it observes that
the Charter has not been incorporated into the EEA Agreement
and consequently asserts that it lacks direct relevance for the
interpretation of the Agreement.
The European Commission
General – Directive 96/71
164. The Commission submits that according to recital 13 in the
preamble to Directive 96/71, the laws of the Member States
should be coordinated in order to lay down a nucleus of
mandatory rules for minimum protection (“the hard core”) to
be observed in the host country by employers who post workers
to perform temporary work there. However, this does not entail
a harmonisation of the material content of the mandatory
rules which thus may be freely defined by the Member States
on condition that the content complies with the Treaty and the
general principles of EU law. 69
165. The Commission further submits that for the purposes of defining
the nucleus of mandatory rules for minimum protection, Article
3(1) of the PWD sets out an exhaustive list of the matters in
respect of which the Member States may give priority to the rules
in force in the host Member State. 70
67 Reference is made to Laval un Partneri, cited above, paragraphs 80 and 81, and Rüffert,
cited above, paragraphs 33 and 34.
68 Reference is made to Case C-37/92 Vanacker and Lesage [1993] ECR i-4947, paragraph 9.
69 Reference is made to Laval un Partneri, cited above, paragraph 60.
70 Reference is made to Commission v Luxembourg, cited above, paragraph 26.
Case E-12/10 EFTA Surveillance xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Authority v iceland
Summary Report
CAse Case
e-12/10
e-xx/x
195