Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 18 January 2011 – Berkizi-Nikolakaki v Anotato Symvoulio epilogis prosopikou and Aristoteleio Panepistimio Thessalonikis
(Case C-272/10)
Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure – Social policy – Article 155(2) TFEU – Directive 1999/70/EC – Clause 8 of the framework agreement on fixed-term work – Fixed-term employment contracts in the public sector – Successive contracts – Abuse – Penalties – Conversion into an employment contract of indefinite duration – Detailed procedural rules – Time-limit – Principles of equivalence and effectiveness – Reduction in the general level of protection afforded to workers
1.Social policy – Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP – Directive 1999/70 – Measures to prevent abuse of successive fixed-term contracts (Art. 155(2) TFEU; Council Directive 1999/70, Annex) (see paras 32-33, 37-38, 44-45, 48-49, 51-61, disp. 1)
2.Social policy – Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP – Directive 1999/70 – Reducing the general level of protection of workers in the field of that agreement prohibited (Council Directive 1999/70, Annex, clause 8(3)) (see paras 69, 74, 76-77, disp. 2)
Re:
| Reference for a preliminary ruling – Diikitiko Efetio Thessalonikis – Interpretation of clause 8(3) 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) – National legislation introducing a time-limit for converting fixed-term employment contracts into employment contracts of indefinite duration |
Operative part
1. |
| Article 155(2) TFEU and the Framework Agreement on fixed-term work concluded on 18 March 1999, which is annexed to Council Directive1999/70/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, such as Article 11(2) of Presidential Decree No 164/2004 laying down provisions concerning workers employed under fixed-term contracts in the public sector, which provides that an application by a worker to convert a succession of fixed‑term employment contracts that may be considered to constitute an abuse into an employment contract of indefinite duration must be made to the competent authority within a time-limit of two months from the date of entry into force of that decree, provided that that time-limit is not less favourable than that governing similar domestic actions regarding employment law and does not render impossible or excessively difficult the exercise of rights conferred by Union law, which it is for the referring court to determine. |
2. |
| Clause 8(3) of the Framework Agreement on fixed-term work must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation, such as Article 11(2) of Presidential Decree No 164/2004, which provides that an application by a worker to convert a succession of fixed-term employment contracts that may be considered to constitute an abuse into an employment contract of indefinite duration must be made to the competent authority within a time‑limit of two months from the date of entry into force of that decree, whereas the corresponding time-limits laid down by similar national legislative measures which preceded that date were extended, in so far as that legislation does not affect the general level of protection afforded to fixed-term workers. |