EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62011CO0556
Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 9 February 2012.#María Jesús Lorenzo Martínez v Dirección Provincial de Educación Valladolid.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Juzgado Contencioso-Administrativo de Valladolid — Interpretation of clause 4 of 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 (OJ 1999 L 175, p. 43) — Principle of non-discrimination — Grant to teaching staff of a six-yearly continuing professional education increment — Increment granted exclusively to established (career) civil servants.#First subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure — Social policy — Directive 1999/70/EC — Clause 4(1) of the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP — Fixed-term employment contracts in the public sector — Non-university teaching — Right to six-yearly continuing professional education increments — Exclusion of teachers employed as temporary officials — Principle of non-discrimination.#Case C‑556/11.
Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 9 February 2012.
María Jesús Lorenzo Martínez v Dirección Provincial de Educación Valladolid.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Juzgado Contencioso-Administrativo de Valladolid — Interpretation of clause 4 of 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 (OJ 1999 L 175, p. 43) — Principle of non-discrimination — Grant to teaching staff of a six-yearly continuing professional education increment — Increment granted exclusively to established (career) civil servants.
First subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure — Social policy — Directive 1999/70/EC — Clause 4(1) of the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP — Fixed-term employment contracts in the public sector — Non-university teaching — Right to six-yearly continuing professional education increments — Exclusion of teachers employed as temporary officials — Principle of non-discrimination.
Case C‑556/11.
Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 9 February 2012.
María Jesús Lorenzo Martínez v Dirección Provincial de Educación Valladolid.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Juzgado Contencioso-Administrativo de Valladolid — Interpretation of clause 4 of 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 (OJ 1999 L 175, p. 43) — Principle of non-discrimination — Grant to teaching staff of a six-yearly continuing professional education increment — Increment granted exclusively to established (career) civil servants.
First subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure — Social policy — Directive 1999/70/EC — Clause 4(1) of the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP — Fixed-term employment contracts in the public sector — Non-university teaching — Right to six-yearly continuing professional education increments — Exclusion of teachers employed as temporary officials — Principle of non-discrimination.
Case C‑556/11.
Court reports – general – 'Information on unpublished decisions' section
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:C:2012:67
Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 9 February 2012 — Lorenzo Martínez v Junta de Castilla y León
(Case C‑556/11)
First subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure — Social policy — Directive 1999/70/EC — Clause 4(1) of the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP — Fixed-term employment contracts in the public sector — Non-university teaching — Right to six-yearly continuing professional education increments — Exclusion of teachers employed as temporary officials — Principle of non-discrimination
1. Social policy — Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP — Directive 1999/70 — Conditions of employment — Meaning — Continuing education increment — Included — Duty to apply the principle of non-discrimination (Council Directive 1999/70, Annex, clause 4(1)) (see paras 38-40)
2. Social policy — Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP — Directive 1999/70 — Workers doing the same work — ‘Same work’ — Definition — Workers in a comparable situation — Criteria for assessment — Nature of the work, training requirements and working conditions — Discretion of the national court (Council Directive 1999/70, Annex, clause 3(2)) (see paras 42-46)
3. Social policy — Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP — Directive 1999/70 — Objective reasons justifying different treatment — Meaning — Only justification for different treatment being the provision of national law providing for it — Not permissible (Council Directive 1999/70, Annex, clause 4(1)) (see paras 40, 47-50, 54, operative part)
Re:
| Reference for a preliminary ruling — Juzgado Contencioso-Administrativo de Valladolid — Interpretation of clause 4 of 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 (OJ 1999 L 175, p. 43) — Principle of non-discrimination — Grant to teaching staff of a six-yearly continuing professional education increment — Increment granted exclusively to established (career) civil servants. |
Operative part
Clause 4(1) of the framework agreement on fixed-term work, concluded on 18 March 1999 and annexed 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 precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which restricts, when there are no objective reasons to justify this, the right to receive a six-yearly continuing education increment solely to teachers employed as established (career) civil servants, to the exclusion of those working as temporary officials, when, in respect of the receipt of that increment, those two categories of workers are in comparable situations.