Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Emilia Romagna (Italy) lodged on 4 June 2020 — PG v Ministero della Giustizia, CSM — Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura, Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri

(Case C-236/20)

(2020/C 271/36)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Emilia Romagna

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: PG

Defendants: Ministero della Giustizia, CSM — Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura, Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri

Questions referred

1. Do Articles 20, 21, 31, 33 and 34 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Directive No 1999/70/EC (1) on fixed-term work (Clauses 2 and 4 of the Framework Agreement), Directive No 1997/81/EC (2) on part-time work (Clause 4 of the Framework Agreement), Directive No 2003/88/EC on the organisation of working time (Article 7) and Directive No 2000/78/EC (3) on equal treatment in employment and occupation (Articles 1 and 2(2)(a)) preclude the application of national legislation, such as the Italian legislation set out in Law 374/91, as subsequently amended, and Legislative Decree 92/2016, as consistently interpreted in the case-law, under which giudici di pace (magistrates), as lay judges, in addition to not being treated in the same way as giudici togati (career judges engaged on a permanent basis and salaried) as regards emoluments and pension and social security entitlements, are completely excluded from all forms of pension and social security protection afforded to employees in the public sector?

2. Do EU principles relating to the autonomy and independence of the judiciary, in particular Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, preclude the application of national legislation, such as the Italian legislation under which giudici di pace, as lay judges, in addition to not being treated in the same way as giudici togati as regards emoluments and pension and social security entitlements, are completely excluded from all forms of pension and social security protection afforded to employees in the public sector?

3. Does Clause 5 of the Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC on 18 March 1999, annexed to Directive 1999/70/EC, preclude the application of national legislation, such as the Italian legislation under which the fixed period of service of giudici di pace, as lay judges, originally set at eight years (four plus four years), may be systematically renewed for a further four years without any provision for effective and dissuasive penalties, instead of the employment relationship being converted into one of indefinite duration?

(1) 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).

(2) Council Directive 97/81/EC of 15 December 1997 concerning the Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC — Annex: Framework agreement on part-time work (OJ 1998 L 14, p. 9).

(3) Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16).