Information;Order — ECLI:EU:C:2022:411
Date: 2022-05-18
Language of the case: Italian
Court formation: Sixth Chamber
Subject matter: Principles, objectives and tasks of the Treaties;Social Policy;Fundamental rights;Charter of Fundamental Rights
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling;Reference for a preliminary ruling - decision unnecessary
Origin: Italy

Summary C-450/21 – 1 
Case C-450/21 
Summary of the request for a preliminary ruling pursuant to Article 98(1) of 
the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice 
Date lodged:  
20 July 2021 
Referring court:  
Tribunale ordinario di Vercelli (Italy) 
Date of the decision to refer:  
16 July 2021 
Applicant:  
UC 
Defendant:  
Ministero dell’Istruzione 
  
Subject matter of the main proceedings 
Recognition of the right of the applicant, a teacher on a fixed-term contract, to 
receive the bonus awarded to teachers in the form of an electronic card, to be used 
for the training and continuous professional development of teaching staff, as 
provided for in Article 1 of legge n. 107/2015 (Law No 107/2015). 
Subject matter and legal basis of the request 
The reference for a preliminary ruling pursuant to Article 267 TFEU seeks to 
determine whether Article 1 of Law No 107/2015 is contrary to clauses 4 and 6 of 
the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and 
CEEP, put into effect by Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999. 
Questions referred for a preliminary ruling 
‘(1) Is clause 4(1) of the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded on 
18 March 1999, annexed to Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999, to be 
EN 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING – CASE C-450/21 
 
2  
interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that contained in 
Article 1(121) of legge n. 107/2015 (Law No 107/2015), which expressly 
excludes the recognition and payment of additional remuneration of EUR 500 for 
teaching staff hired by the Ministero dell’Istruzione (Italian Ministry of 
Education) on fixed-term contracts, since such additional remuneration is solely 
for the training and continuous professional development of staff hired on 
contracts of indefinite duration? 
(2) Is additional remuneration of EUR 500 per year, such as that provided for in 
Article 1(121) of Law No 107/2015 [and Article] 2 of decreto legge n. 22/2020 
(Decree-Law No 22/2020), (‘the teacher’s electronic card’), which is intended to 
be used to purchase training materials and services aimed at developing 
professional skills and to purchase connectivity services, to be considered covered 
by the employment conditions referred to in clause 4(1) of the framework 
agreement on fixed-term work concluded on 18 March 1999? 
(3) In the event that this allowance is deemed not to be covered by the 
abovementioned employment conditions, is clause 6 of the framework agreement 
on fixed-term work, concluded on 18 March 1999, in conjunction with Article 150 
[TEC], Article 14 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union 
and Article 10 of the European Social Charter, to be interpreted as precluding a 
provision of national law, such as that contained in Article 1(121) of Law 
No 107/2015, which gives only workers with an employment contract or 
relationship of indefinite duration the right to receive funding for training, despite 
the fact that they are in a comparable situation to that of fixed-term workers? 
(4) Within the scope of Directive 1999/70/EC, are the general principles of 
[European Union] law presently in force on equality, equal treatment and non-
discrimination in matters of employment, enshrined in Articles 20 and 21 of the 
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in Directives 2000/43/EC 
and 2000/78/EC and in clause 4 of the framework agreement on fixed-term work 
concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP, put into effect by Directive 
[1]999/70/EC, to be interpreted as precluding a legal provision such as the one 
contained in Article 1(121) of Law No 107/2015, which allows teachers who are 
in a comparable situation to permanent teachers, as regards the type of work and 
employment conditions, having performed the same duties and possessing the 
same disciplinary, pedagogical, methodological, organisational, interpersonal and 
research skills, obtained through teaching experience recognised as equivalent 
under the same national legislation, to be treated less favourably and to be 
subjected to discrimination regarding their employment conditions and access to 
training, solely because they have a fixed-term employment relationship? 
(5) Is clause 6 of the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded on 
18 March 1999, read in the light of and in accordance with the general principles 
of [European Union] law presently in force on equality, equal treatment and non-
discrimination in matters of employment and the fundamental rights enshrined in 
Articles 14, 20 and 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European 
MINISTERO DELL’ISTRUZIONE 
 
3 
Union, to be interpreted as precluding a provision of national law, such as that 
contained in Article 1(121) of Law No 107/2015, which gives only workers with 
an employment relationship of indefinite duration access to training?’ 
Provisions of European Union law relied on 
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), (‘the framework agreement’), in particular clause 4, ‘Principle of 
non-discrimination’ [‘1. In respect of employment conditions, fixed-term workers 
shall not be treated in a less favourable manner than comparable permanent 
workers solely because they have a fixed-term contract or relation unless different 
treatment is justified on objective grounds …’], and clause 6(2). 
Provisions of national law relied on 
Legge del 13 luglio 2015, n. 107, Riforma del sistema nazionale di istruzione e 
formazione e delega per il riordino delle disposizioni legislative vigenti (Law 
No 107 of 13 July 2015, Reform of the national education and training system and 
restructuring of the legislation in force) (Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica 
Italiana, General Series No 162 of 15 July 2015), Article 1(121) to (124) (‘Law 
No 107/2015’). 
In particular, under paragraph 121, in order to support the in-service training of 
teachers and enhance their professional skills, an electronic card has been 
introduced for the training and continuous professional development of tenured 
teaching staff in all types of schools and at all educational levels. According to the 
legal provision, the electronic card – which represents an annual nominal amount 
of EUR 500 for each school year – may be used, inter alia, to purchase books and 
texts (including in digital format), publications and journals relevant in any way 
for their continuous professional development, to purchase hardware and 
software, to enrol on courses for continuous professional development activities 
and the certification of professional skills, and to attend cultural events. The 
amount on the card does not constitute additional remuneration or taxable income. 
Paragraph 124 provides that in-service training of tenured teaching staff is 
mandatory, permanent and structural. The training activities are defined by 
individual schools on the basis of a national training plan. 
Decreto del Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri del 23 settembre 2015 recante le 
‘Modalità di assegnazione e di utilizzo della Carta elettronica per l’aggiornamento 
e la formazione del docente di ruolo delle istituzioni scolastiche di ogni ordine e 
grado’ (Prime Ministerial Decree of 23 September 2015 on the conditions for 
issuing and using the electronic card for the training and continuous professional 
development of tenured teaching staff in all types of schools and at all educational 
levels; ‘the Prime Ministerial Decree’), Article 2: 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING – CASE C-450/21 
 
4  
‘1. Full-time and part-time permanent teaching staff in state schools, including 
teachers in training and on probation, shall be entitled to receive a Card, which 
shall be issued on a named, personal and non-transferable basis. … 4. The Card 
shall be issued, in its maximum total amount, solely to the permanent teaching 
staff referred to in paragraph 1. In the event that the teacher has been suspended 
on disciplinary grounds, the use of the Card shall be prohibited … The Ministry of 
Education, University and Research shall define the procedures for revoking the 
Card in the event that the employment relationship is terminated during the school 
year …’  
Decreto legislativo del 16 aprile 1994, n. 297, Approvazione del testo unico delle 
disposizioni legislative vigenti in materia di istruzione, relative alle scuole di ogni 
ordine e grado, (Legislative Decree No 297 of 16 April 1994, Ratification of the 
consolidated text of the legislation in force on education, applicable to all types of 
schools and at all educational levels), in particular Article 282 (‘continuous 
professional development is a fundamental right and duty of inspection, 
management and teaching staff’) and Article 440 (which, for teaching staff in 
training and on probation, provides that, after completing a year of training, such 
staff should have their position confirmed).  
The series of national collective bargaining agreements for schools, the most 
recent of which is dated 27 November 2007, reiterate that head teachers and 
teaching, educational, administrative, technical and auxiliary staff are entitled to 
take part in training and continuous professional development activities, and that 
the Administration is required to provide the necessary tools, resources and 
opportunities for in-service training.  
Decreto-legge dell’8 aprile 2020, n. 22, Misure urgenti sulla regolare conclusione 
e l’ordinato avvio dell’anno scolastico e sullo svolgimento degli esami di Stato, 
nonché’ in materia di procedure concorsuali e di abilitazione e per la continuità 
della gestione accademica (Decree-Law No 22 of 8 April 2020, Emergency 
measures for the proper conclusion and orderly start of the school year and 
concerning state examinations, as well as competition and certification procedures 
and the continuity of academic management) (Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica 
Italiana No 93 of 8 April 2020), in particular Article 2: ‘in view of the suspension 
of classroom teaching due to the pandemic, teaching staff shall continue teaching 
remotely, using the electronic or technological tools at their disposal’. In addition, 
to purchase connectivity services, teachers are permitted to use the electronic card 
for teacher training and continuous professional development. 
Succinct presentation of the facts and procedure in the main proceedings 
1 The applicant worked for the Italian Ministry of Education as a teacher on fixed-
term contracts from the 2015/2016 school year until the 2020/2021 school year. 
The applicant was not eligible for the teacher’s electronic card – that is to say the 
MINISTERO DELL’ISTRUZIONE 
 
5 
sum of EUR 500 per year provided for in Article 1(121) of Law No 107/2015 to 
purchase training materials and services aimed at developing professional skills. 
2 The applicant instituted the proceedings in question seeking recognition of her 
right to receive the abovementioned financial benefit from 2015 onwards, or 
alternatively, at least for the 2019/2020 school year and/or the 2020/2021 school 
year. 
3 The Italian Ministry of Education, entering an appearance, considered the 
application made by the applicant to be unfounded, both with regard to the service 
provided up until the 2019/2020 school year and in relation to the service 
provided after the entry into force of Article 2 of Decree-Law No 22/2020, which 
allowed the electronic card to be used to purchase connectivity services. 
4 The parties jointly made an application to the referring court to refer certain 
questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union for a preliminary ruling 
pursuant to Article 267 TFEU. 
The essential arguments of the parties in the main proceedings 
5 As a basis for her application, the applicant submits that the electronic card must 
also be issued to staff on fixed-term contracts, since the legislation and collective 
bargaining agreements in force provide for the same training entitlement and 
requirement for both fixed-term and permanent teaching staff. 
6 According to the applicant, Article 1 of Law No 107/2015, in so far as it grants 
additional remuneration of EUR 500 per year only to permanent staff, amounts to 
discrimination prohibited under clause 4 of the framework agreement, which must 
be interpreted in accordance with Articles 20 and 21 of the Charter of 
Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’). In addition, the 
national legislation also conflicts with clause 6 of the framework agreement, 
which stipulates that, as far as possible, employers should facilitate access by 
fixed-term workers to appropriate training opportunities to enhance their skills, 
career development and occupational mobility. The applicant points out that that 
clause should in turn be interpreted in accordance with Article 14 of the Charter. 
7 The Italian Ministry of Education does not dispute that the services provided by 
the applicant are comparable to those provided by tenured staff as regards the 
duties performed and professional skills required, nor does it dispute that fixed-
term staff also have a continuous professional development obligation. However, 
it points out that the electronic card and compulsory training are two different, 
interrelated aspects of teacher training, and the fact that fixed-term staff have a 
training obligation does not necessarily mean that they are also entitled to the 
electronic card.  
8 According to the Ministry, fixed-term staff are not eligible for the sum at issue 
since ‘Law No 107/2015 directly identified as being eligible for the electronic 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING – CASE C-450/21 
 
6  
card for training and continuous professional development the category of tenured 
teachers’. The Prime Ministerial Decree simply gives effect to the provisions of 
that law. 
9 Furthermore, the Ministry considers that the failure to provide such a benefit does 
not infringe the principle of non-discrimination since it is not covered by 
‘employment conditions’ under clause 4(1) of the framework agreement. Nor is 
there any infringement of clause 6 of the framework agreement, since it provides 
for the training obligation only ‘as far as possible’ and does not require the Italian 
Government to introduce relevant rules specifically for teacher training that ensure 
absolute equality of treatment between fixed-term and permanent workers. 
10 The Ministry takes the view that fixed-term staff are not eligible for the electronic 
card despite the fact that Article 2 of Decree-Law No 22/2020 required teaching 
staff to continue providing their services by means of remote teaching using the 
electronic card to purchase connectivity services, since that option was only 
temporary ‘in view of the suspension of classroom teaching due to the pandemic’. 
The option of using the electronic card to purchase connectivity services was 
solely for the purpose of remote teaching, which does not directly benefit the 
teacher as training and continuous professional development does, but rather 
benefits the pupils. 
Succinct presentation of the reasoning in the request for a preliminary ruling 
11 In the view of the referring court, it is common ground that the dispute concerns a 
fixed-term employment relationship comparable to that of permanent workers. 
The parties disagree only on whether the additional remuneration represented by 
the electronic card is covered by ‘employment conditions’ under clause 4(1) of the 
framework agreement. 
12 First, the referring court observes in general terms that the objective of the 
framework agreement, as set out in recital 14 of Directive 1999/70 – namely ‘to 
improve the quality of fixed-term work by ensuring the application of the 
principle of non-discrimination’ – is conducive to the application of clause 4, 
particularly given that the third paragraph in the preamble to the framework 
agreement refers to ‘the willingness of the Social Partners to establish a general 
framework for ensuring equal treatment for fixed-term workers by protecting them 
against discrimination’ (see judgment of the Court of Justice of 22 December 
2010, Gavieiro Gavieiro and Iglesias Torres, C-444/09 and C-456/09, 
paragraph 47). 
13 According to the referring court, the substantive rules laid down in Article 2 of the 
Prime Ministerial Decree also seem to suggest that the electronic card may be 
covered by employment conditions, in so far as it provides for the revocation of 
the electronic card in the event of termination of the employment relationship 
during the school year. The fact that the entitlement to the EUR 500 depends on 
the actual provision of the service would suggest that the eligibility for the 
MINISTERO DELL’ISTRUZIONE 
 
7 
electronic card is predicated on the existence of the employment relationship, and 
so is covered by ‘employment conditions’. This is consistent with the settled case-
law of the Court of Justice, according to which ‘the decisive criterion for 
determining whether a measure falls within the scope of that concept is the 
criterion of employment, that is to say the employment relationship between a 
worker and his employer’ (judgment of 5 June 2018, Grupo Norte Facility, 
C-574/16, EU:C:2018:390, paragraph 41 and the case-law cited). 
14 The referring court recalls that the Court of Justice has already clarified in similar 
cases that clause 4(1) of the framework agreement must be interpreted as 
precluding national legislation which restricts, when there are no objective reasons 
to justify this, the right to receive a continuing education increment to teachers 
employed as established (career) civil servants only, to the exclusion of those 
working as temporary officials (see order of 9 February 2012, Lorenzo Martínez, 
C-556/11). 
15 The referring court is also of the opinion that even the stated objective of training 
and continuous professional development is questionable, given that the electronic 
card can be used in various ways, as confirmed by Article 2 of Decree-Law 
No 22/2020 which authorises the use of the card ‘to purchase connectivity 
services’ for remote teaching.  
16 The referring court notes that the Court of Justice has made it clear that clause 4 of 
the agreement articulates a principle of EU social law which cannot be interpreted 
restrictively (judgment of 22 December 2010, Gavieiro Gavieiro and Iglesias 
Torres, C-444/09 and C-456/09, paragraph 49), in line with Articles 20 and 21 of 
the Charter, as well as Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 
establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and 
occupation, and Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the 
Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal 
opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment 
and occupation.  
17 According to the referring court, the failure to pay the sum at issue cannot not be 
considered objectively justified by any real need, given that under Italian 
legislation the Ministry is required to provide the necessary tools, resources and 
opportunities for in-service training, for both fixed-term and permanent staff, and 
that teachers on fixed-term contracts are also entitled and required to participate in 
training and continuous professional development activities.  
18 The differing treatment of fixed-term and permanent teachers also does not appear 
to be justified by the stability of the relationship enjoyed by permanent teachers, 
given that the increment in question is also paid to teachers during the 
probationary period.  
19 The referring court considers it irrelevant that according to Law No 107/2015, ‘the 
amount on the card does not constitute additional remuneration or taxable 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING – CASE C-450/21 
 
8  
income’, not only because the prohibition of discrimination covers all 
employment conditions, but also because Article 2 of Decree-Law No 22/2020 
provides that ‘teaching staff shall continue to teach remotely, using … the 
electronic card for teacher training and continuous professional development to 
purchase connectivity services’. 
20 As regards the alleged infringement of clause 6 of the framework agreement, the 
referring court points out that in accordance with Article 51(1) of the Charter, the 
Member States must, when they are implementing EU law, respect the rights, 
observe the principles and promote the application of the provisions of the Charter 
(see Opinion of Advocate General Hogan in Case C-243/19). Thus it is also 
necessary to clarify whether the legislature, on the basis of the principles of equal 
treatment laid down in Articles 20 and 21 of the Charter, should nevertheless have 
ensured equal treatment between fixed-term and permanent workers regarding 
training and access to connectivity services, imposed by Article 2 of Decree-Law 
No 22/2020 for remote teaching, given the clear comparability of their 
employment situation and considering that continuous training constitutes a 
mandatory, structural and permanent functional activity for all teaching staff. The 
referring court further notes that, according to the Court of Justice, ‘the principle 
of equal treatment is a general principle of EU law enshrined in Article 20 of the 
Charter, of which the principle of non-discrimination laid down in Article 21(1) of 
the Charter is a particular expression … that general principle requires that 
comparable situations must not be treated differently and that different situations 
must not be treated in the same way unless such treatment is objectively justified. 
A difference in treatment is justified if it is based on an objective and reasonable 
criterion, that is, whether the difference relates to a legally permitted aim pursued 
by the legislation in question, and it is proportionate to the aim pursued by the 
treatment’ (judgment of 29 October 2020, Veselības ministrija, C-243/19, 
paragraphs 35 and 37).