Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62014CA0177

    Case C-177/14: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 9 July 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — María José Regojo Dans v Consejo de Estado (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 1999/70/EC — Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP — Clauses 3 and 4 — Principle of non-discrimination — ‘Non-permanent staff’ — Refusal to grant a three-yearly length-of-service increment — Objective grounds)

    OJ C 294, 7.9.2015, p. 9–9 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    7.9.2015   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 294/9


    Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 9 July 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — María José Regojo Dans v Consejo de Estado

    (Case C-177/14) (1)

    ((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Directive 1999/70/EC - Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP - Clauses 3 and 4 - Principle of non-discrimination - ‘Non-permanent staff’ - Refusal to grant a three-yearly length-of-service increment - Objective grounds))

    (2015/C 294/11)

    Language of the case: Spanish

    Referring court

    Tribunal Supremo

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Applicant: María José Regojo Dans

    Defendant: Consejo de Estado

    Operative part of the judgment

    1.

    The concept of a ‘fixed-term worker’, within the meaning of clause 3(1) of the framework agreement on fixed-term work, concluded on 18 March 1999, which is set out in the Annex to Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP, must be interpreted as applying to a worker such as the applicant in the main proceedings.

    2.

    Clause 4(1) of the framework agreement on fixed-term work must be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which excludes, without justification on objective grounds, non-permanent staff from the right to receive a three-yearly length-of-service increment granted, inter alia, to career civil servants when, as regards the receipt of that increment, those two categories of workers are in comparable situations, a matter which is for the referring court to ascertain.


    (1)  OJ C 253, 4.8.2014.


    Top