EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62020CA0265
Case C-265/20: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 5 May 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Antwerpen — Belgium) — FN v Universiteit Antwerpen and Others (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Part-time work — Directive 97/81/EC — Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC — Clause 4.1 — Principle of non-discrimination — Part-time academic staff — Automatic permanent appointments reserved for academic staff members holding a full-time teaching post — Calculation of the percentage of a full-time workload to which a part-time workload corresponds — No requirements)
Case C-265/20: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 5 May 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Antwerpen — Belgium) — FN v Universiteit Antwerpen and Others (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Part-time work — Directive 97/81/EC — Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC — Clause 4.1 — Principle of non-discrimination — Part-time academic staff — Automatic permanent appointments reserved for academic staff members holding a full-time teaching post — Calculation of the percentage of a full-time workload to which a part-time workload corresponds — No requirements)
Case C-265/20: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 5 May 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Antwerpen — Belgium) — FN v Universiteit Antwerpen and Others (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Part-time work — Directive 97/81/EC — Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC — Clause 4.1 — Principle of non-discrimination — Part-time academic staff — Automatic permanent appointments reserved for academic staff members holding a full-time teaching post — Calculation of the percentage of a full-time workload to which a part-time workload corresponds — No requirements)
OJ C 244, 27.6.2022, p. 5–6
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
27.6.2022 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 244/5 |
Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 5 May 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Antwerpen — Belgium) — FN v Universiteit Antwerpen and Others
(Case C-265/20) (1)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Part-time work - Directive 97/81/EC - Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC - Clause 4.1 - Principle of non-discrimination - Part-time academic staff - Automatic permanent appointments reserved for academic staff members holding a full-time teaching post - Calculation of the percentage of a full-time workload to which a part-time workload corresponds - No requirements)
(2022/C 244/06)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Hof van beroep te Antwerpen
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: FN
Defendant: Universiteit Antwerpen, Vlaamse Autonome Hogeschool Hogere Zeevaartschool, PB, ZK, NG, ZN, UM
Operative part of the judgment
|
1. |
Clause 4.1 of the Framework Agreement on part-time work, concluded on 6 June 1997, annexed to Council Directive 97/81/EC of 15 December 1997 concerning the Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC, as amended by Council Directive 98/23/EC of 7 April 1998, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation and practice under which an academic staff member holding a full-time teaching post is to be automatically appointed on a permanent basis, without any objective reason other than the fact that that position is held on a full-time basis, whereas an academic staff member holding a part-time teaching post is to be either appointed on a permanent basis or employed on a temporary basis; |
|
2. |
The Framework Agreement on part-time work, concluded on 6 June 1997, annexed to Council Directive 97/81, as amended by Directive 98/23, must be interpreted as meaning that it does not lay down any requirements for an employer hiring a part-time worker as to the method of calculating the full-time workload to which a part-time workload corresponds. |