29.1.2011 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 30/11 |
Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 1 October 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Rossano (Italy)) — Franco Affatato v Azienda Sanitaria Provinciale di Cosenza
(Case C-3/10) (1)
(Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure - Social policy - Directive 1999/70/EC - Clause 5 of the Framework Agreement on fixed-term work - Fixed-term employment contracts in the public sector - Successive contracts - Abuse - Preventive measures - Sanctions - Conversion of fixed-term contracts to a contract of unlimited duration - Prohibition - Compensation for damage - Principles of equivalence and effectiveness)
2011/C 30/17
Language of the case: Italian
Referring court
Tribunale di Rossano (Italy)
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Franco Affatato
Defendant: Azienda Sanitaria Provinciale di Cosenza
Re:
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunale di Rossano — Interpretation of Clauses 2, 3, 4 and 5 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) — Compatibility of certain provisions of national law on socially useful workers/publicly useful workers — National legislation that allows not indicating the reason for the first a fixed-term contract for workers in the education sector — Concept of a state body — Inclusion of a person with the characteristics of Poste Italiane SpA
Operative part of the order
1. |
The first 12 questions referred by the Tribunale di Rossano (Italy), by decision of 21 December 2009, are manifestly inadmissible. |
2. |
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 meaning that:
|
3. |
That framework agreement must be interpreted as meaning that measures provides for by national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, in order to penalise the abusive use of fixed-term employment contracts or relationships must not be less favourable than those governing similar internal situations or make it practically impossible or excessively difficult to exercise the rights conferred by the legal order of the European Union. It is for the national court to assess to what extent the provisions of domestic law intended to penalise the abusive use by the public administration of successive fixed-term employment contracts or relationships comply with those principles. |