Case C-473/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sächsisches Finanzhof (Germany) lodged on 5 November 2008 — Ingenieurbüro Eulitz GbR Thomas and Marion Eulitz v Finanzamt Dresden I
Date: 2008-11-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: architecture, engineer, higher education, interpretation of the law

C 44/26

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

21.2.2009

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sächsisches
Finanzhof
lodged on 5 November 2008 —
Ingenieurbüro Eulitz GbR Thomas and Marion Eulitz v
Finanzamt Dresden I

(Germany)

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht
Innsbruck (Austria)
lodged on 12 November 2008 —
Zentralbetriebsrat der Landeskrankenhauser Tirols v Land
Tirol

(Case C-473/08)

(2009/C 44/43)

(Case C-486/08)

(2009/C 44/44)

Language of the case: German

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Sächsisches Finanzhof

Referring court

Landesgericht Innsbruck als Arbeits- und Sozialgericht

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Ingenieurbüro Eulitz GbR Thomas and Marion Eulitz

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Zentralbetriebsrat der Landeskrankenhauser Tirols

Defendant: Finanzamt Dresden I

Questions referred

1. Is teaching and examination work which a graduate engineer
performs at an education institute established as a private-
law association for participants in advanced training courses
who already have at least a university or higher technical
college qualification as an architect or an engineer or who
have an equivalent education, where the course is concluded
with an examination, ‘school or university education’ within
the meaning of Article 13A(1)(j) of Directive 77/388/EEC (1)?

2. Is a person who otherwise satisfies the requirements to be a
teacher giving tuition privately within the meaning of the
provision referred to under 1 excluded from that category of
persons if

— he receives payment (in full or in part) for his teaching
classes even if no participants have enrolled for the
teaching class in question, but he has already done
preparatory work for it, or

— he is responsible, repeatedly and continuously over a
considerable period of time, for organising the relevant
teaching and examination work, or

— in addition to his direct tuition work, he has taken on a
professionally and/or organisationally prominent position
compared with the other lecturers on the course in ques-
tion?

Is such exclusion to be taken to exist if just one of those criteria
is satisfied, or only if two or all three criteria have been met?

(1) OJ L 145, p. 1.

Defendant: Land Tirol

Questions referred

1. Is it compatible with Clause 4(1) of the Framework Agree-
ment on part-time work of 6 June 1997 which was imple-
mented by the Directive on part-time work (Council Direc-
tive 97/81/EC (1) of 15 December 1997, OJ 1998 L 14,
p. 9), that workers employed under a private law contract by
a local or regional authority or a public undertaking and
who work less than 12 hours per week (30 % of the normal
working time), be treated less favourably than comparable
full-time workers with regard to remuneration, classification
in salary group, recognition of previous periods of service,
entitlement
to leave, additional payments and overtime
supplements etc.?

2. Is the pro-rata-temporis principle, as set out in Clause 4(2) of
the Framework Agreement, to be interpreted as precluding a
provision of national
law such as Paragraph 55(5) of the
L-VBG, under which in the event of a change in the working
hours of an employee, the amount of leave not yet taken is
adjusted proportionally to the new working hours, with the
result that the worker who reduces his working hours from
full-time to part-time, has his entitlement to leave accumu-
lated while working full-time reduced or, as a part-time
worker, he can only take that leave with a reduced level of
payment for leave?

3. Is a provision of national law, such as Paragraph 1(2)(m) of
the L-VBG, according to which workers employed for a
period not exceeding 6 months or on a casual basis are
treated less favourably with regard to remuneration, classifi-
cation in salary group, recognition of previous periods of
service, entitlement to leave, additional payments and over-
time supplements etc., contrary to Clause 4 of the Frame-
work Agreement of the European Social Partners as imple-
mented by Directive on fixed-term work 1999/70/EC (2) of
28 June 1999 (OJ 1999 L 175, p. 43)?