## Facts

- Norbert Jaeger, a hospital surgeon employed by the City of Kiel, performed regular on-call duty requiring his physical presence in the hospital.
- During on-call periods, he could rest or sleep in a provided room but had to remain on the premises and be ready to work immediately when called.
- Under applicable national and collective arrangements, only part of long on-call periods was counted as working time; the remainder was treated as rest unless active duties were performed.
- Jaeger challenged this classification, arguing that the entire on-call period spent at the hospital should be treated as working time under EU working-time rules.
- A German labor court referred interpretive questions to the Court of Justice in preliminary-ruling proceedings regarding the definitions of working time and rest, weekly limits, daily rest, and permissible derogations for hospital service.

## Issues

1. Whether on-call duty requiring a doctor’s physical presence at the hospital, including time spent resting or sleeping when not actively working, constitutes “working time” in its entirety.
2. Whether national laws or collective agreements may classify inactive portions of such on-call duty as “rest periods” and exclude them from limits on working time.
3. Whether derogations reducing minimum daily rest for hospital on-call duty are lawful without immediate equivalent compensatory rest and while respecting the maximum average weekly working-time limit.

## Decision

- The Court held that on-call duty requiring the worker’s physical presence at the workplace constitutes working time in its entirety, including inactive periods spent resting or sleeping at the workplace.
- The Court ruled that national measures cannot classify as rest the inactive portions of on-call duty performed under an obligation to remain at the hospital.
- The Court stated that any permitted derogation reducing daily rest for hospital continuity-of-service needs must provide equivalent compensatory rest immediately after the reduction and must not allow breach of the maximum average weekly working-time limit.

## Legal Principles

- “Working time” and “rest period” are autonomous EU-law concepts requiring uniform interpretation; Member States may not redefine their scope through national law or practice.
- Working time includes any period when the worker is at the employer’s disposal and required to remain at a place determined by the employer, able to provide services immediately; on-site on-call duty meets this test for its full duration.
- Working time and rest are mutually exclusive categories under the Directive; there is no intermediate category permitting inactive on-site on-call hours to be treated as rest.
- Derogations for activities requiring continuity of service (including hospitals) are construed narrowly and require equivalent compensatory rest, generally to be granted immediately after the missed rest, subject to continued compliance with weekly working-time limits.

## Conclusion

The Court interpreted EU working-time rules to require that on-call duty performed under mandatory on-site presence in a hospital be treated entirely as working time, forbidding national schemes that treat inactive on-call hours as rest, and permitting rest-derogations only with prompt equivalent compensatory rest and within weekly hour limits.


Landeshauptstadt Kiel v. Jaeger, Case C-151/02 (C.J.E.U. 2003)