{"id":13513,"date":"2026-08-27T08:15:55","date_gmt":"2026-08-27T06:15:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/bloglaboral.garrigues.com\/?p=13513"},"modified":"2026-08-24T13:54:15","modified_gmt":"2026-08-24T11:54:15","slug":"company-agreement-versus-sectoral-agreement-when-can-the-former-prevail","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/bloglaboral.garrigues.com\/en\/company-agreement-versus-sectoral-agreement-when-can-the-former-prevail","title":{"rendered":"Company agreement versus sectoral agreement: when can the former prevail?"},"content":{"rendered":"

The company collective agreement can be shielded against the sectoral agreement. The key is in time: if the agreement came into force before the sectoral one, it prevails in all matters, including wages. If, on the other hand, the company agreement comes later, it will only have priority in limited matters.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

In this post we explain the two cases in which the company agreement prevails over the sectoral agreement, why it is important to distinguish between the two, and how the most recent case law on the matter is pronounced.<\/p>\n

The general rule: the previous collective agreement must be respected (article 84.1 WS)<\/strong><\/p>\n

The first paragraph of article 84 of the Workers\u2019 Statute<\/a> (WS) forges the principle that a collective agreement that is already in force cannot be replaced by a subsequent agreement of a different scope. In other words: the one that is approved first prevails.<\/p>\n

In the legal tradition this idea is expressed by the Latin maxim prior in tempore, potior in iure<\/em>, which means \u201cthe first in time has the best right\u201d. In the field of collective agreements, this principle implies that, if a company negotiates its agreement and it enters into force before a sectoral agreement is approved that seeks to regulate the same matters, the scope of negotiation initiated in the company is shielded, so that the subsequent sectoral collective agreement cannot invade that already regulated space (Judgment of the Supreme Court,\u00a0 of April 16, 2026<\/a>).<\/p>\n

This protection extends for the duration of the pre-existing agreement, including its express extensions and, according to part of the judicial doctrine, even the situation of ultra-activity when the bargaining unit is still alive and the negotiators continue to renew the text without having evidently abandoned it.<\/p>\n

A crucial note: this priority is not based on the fact that the agreement is a company agreement. It is based on the fact that it is prior in time. It is irrelevant whether it is from a company, workplace, provincial or regional sector: the one that was already in force prevails over the one that comes later. That is why this rule is called absolute temporal priority<\/strong>: absolute because it extends to all matters of the agreement, including wages, working hours and any other working conditions.<\/p>\n

The exception: priority limited to certain matters (article 84.2 WS)<\/strong><\/p>\n

The second paragraph of article 84 of the WS regulates under what conditions and for which matters a company agreement has priority over the sectoral agreement, when the latter is prior to the first.<\/p>\n

The matters in which the subsequent company agreement may prevail over the pre-existing sectoral agreement are:<\/p>\n