This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62019CA0326
Case C-326/19: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 3 June 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale amministrativo regionale per il Lazio — Italy) — EB v Presidenza dei Consiglio dei Ministri, Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca — MIUR, Università degli Studi ‘Roma Tre’ (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 1999/70/EC — Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP — Clause 5 — Successive fixed-term employment contracts or relationships — Misuse — Preventive measures — Fixed-term employment contracts in the public sector — University researchers)
Case C-326/19: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 3 June 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale amministrativo regionale per il Lazio — Italy) — EB v Presidenza dei Consiglio dei Ministri, Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca — MIUR, Università degli Studi ‘Roma Tre’ (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 1999/70/EC — Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP — Clause 5 — Successive fixed-term employment contracts or relationships — Misuse — Preventive measures — Fixed-term employment contracts in the public sector — University researchers)
Case C-326/19: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 3 June 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale amministrativo regionale per il Lazio — Italy) — EB v Presidenza dei Consiglio dei Ministri, Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca — MIUR, Università degli Studi ‘Roma Tre’ (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 1999/70/EC — Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP — Clause 5 — Successive fixed-term employment contracts or relationships — Misuse — Preventive measures — Fixed-term employment contracts in the public sector — University researchers)
OJ C 289, 19.7.2021, p. 4–5
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
19.7.2021 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 289/4 |
Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 3 June 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale amministrativo regionale per il Lazio — Italy) — EB v Presidenza dei Consiglio dei Ministri, Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca — MIUR, Università degli Studi ‘Roma Tre’
(Case C-326/19) (1)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Directive 1999/70/EC - Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP - Clause 5 - Successive fixed-term employment contracts or relationships - Misuse - Preventive measures - Fixed-term employment contracts in the public sector - University researchers)
(2021/C 289/05)
Language of the case: Italian
Referring court
Tribunale amministrativo regionale per il Lazio
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: EB
Defendants: Presidenza dei Consiglio dei Ministri, Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca — MIUR, Università degli Studi ‘Roma Tre’
Intervening parties: Federazione Lavoratori della Conoscenza — CGIL (FLC-CGIL), Confederazione Generale Italiana del Lavoro (CGIL), Anief — Associazione Professionale e Sindacale, Confederazione Generale Sindacale, Cipur — Coordinamento Intersedi Professori Universitari di Ruolo
Operative part of the judgment
Clause 5 of the framework agreement on fixed-term work, concluded on 18 March 1999 which is 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 not precluding national legislation under which provision is made, in respect of the recruitment of university researchers, for the conclusion of a fixed-term contract for a period of three years, with a single possibility of extension, for a maximum period of two years, making the conclusion of such contracts subject, first, to the condition that resources are available ‘for planning for the purposes of carrying out research, teaching, non-curricular activities and student service activities’, and, second, that such contracts are extended on condition that there is a ‘positive appraisal of the teaching and research activities carried out’, without it being necessary for those rules to define objective and transparent criteria making it possible to verify that the conclusion and renewal of such contracts do indeed meet a genuine need, and that they are likely to achieve the objective pursued and are necessary for that purpose.