Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 12 December 2013 — Papalia

(Case C‑50/13)

‛Request for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court — Social policy — Directive 1999/70/EC — Clause 5 of the Framework Agreement on fixed-term work — Public sector — Successive contracts — Misuse — Compensation for damage — Conditions for the payment of compensation in the event of the unlawful fixing of a date on which a contract of employment will expire — Principles of equivalence and effectiveness’

1. Social policy — Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP — Directive 1999/70 — Measures to prevent misuse of successive fixed-term employment contracts — National legislation precluding, in the public sector only, the transformation of unfair successive fixed-term contracts of employment into indefinite contracts — Lawfulness — Condition — Existence, in that sector, of another effective measure to prevent and, where necessary, penalise misuse of such contracts — Observance of the principles of equivalence and effectiveness — Determination by the national court (Council Directive 1999/70, Annex, clause 5) (see paras 16, 17, 21, 22, 25, 30)

2. Social policy — Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP — Directive 1999/70 — Measures to prevent misuse of successive fixed-term contracts — National legislation precluding, in the public sector only, the transformation of unfair successive fixed-term contracts of employment into indefinite contracts — Worker seeking compensation for harm suffered as a result of misuse by his previous public-sector employer of such contracts — Obligation for such a worker to furnish evidence that better employment opportunities were foregone — Obligation rendering impossible, in practice, or excessively difficult the exercise of the rights granted under EU law — Not permissible — Determination by the national court (Council Directive 1999/70, Annex, clause 5) (see paras 26, 34, 35 and operative part)

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Tribunale ordinario di Aosta — Interpretation of Clause 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) — Public administration — Compensation in the event of the unlawful fixing of a date on which a contract of employment will expire — Conditions — Evidence of damage incurred — Need to prove that better work opportunities were foregone.

Operative part:

The framework agreement on fixed-term work, concluded on 18 March 1999, which is set out in 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, must be interpreted as precluding measures provided for by national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which, in the event of misuse by a public employer of successive fixed-term employment contracts, provides solely for the right for the worker concerned to obtain compensation for the damage which he considers himself to have therefore incurred, without any transformation of the fixed-term employment relationship into an employment relationship for an indefinite period, where the right to that compensation is subject to the obligation on that worker to prove that he was forced to forego better work opportunities, although the effect of that obligation is to render impossible in practice or excessively difficult the exercise by that worker of rights conferred by EU law.

It is for the referring court to assess to what extent the provisions of domestic law aimed at penalising the misuse by the public administration of successive fixed-term employment contracts or relationships comply with those principles.