Case C-373/24, Ramavić: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Općinski sud u Puli-Pola (Croatia) lodged on 24 May 2024 – NI v Republic of Croatia
Date: 2024-05-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: arrangement of working time, equal treatment, labour standard, legal working time, public prosecutor's department, rest period, working conditions








C_202405493EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/5493


23.9.2024






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Općinski sud u Puli-Pola (Croatia) lodged on 24 May 2024 – NI v Republic of Croatia


(Case C-373/24, Ramavić)
                (1)

(C/2024/5493)
Language of the case: Croatian

Referring court

Općinski sud u Puli-Pola

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: NI

Defendant: Republic of Croatia

Questions referred







1.


Does the applicant’s position as a public prosecutor (deputy municipal prosecutor/municipal prosecutor) fall within the concept of ‘worker’ referred to in Article 1(3) of Directive 2003/88/EC, (2) read in conjunction with Article 31 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, that is to say, can an officer of the public prosecutor’s office be considered a worker for the purposes of applying the same working conditions to all workers employed in the public prosecutor’s office?










2.


In connection with the first question, must Article 2 of Directive 89/391/EEC, (3) to which Directive 2003/88 refers in Article 1(3), be interpreted as permitting Member States to exclude officers of the public prosecutor’s office (deputy municipal prosecutors/municipal prosecutors) from the application of the provisions ensuring the transposition of that directive, including the provisions of Article 2(1) and (2) of Directive 2003/88/EC, which define working time and rest periods?










3. (a)


If the first question is answered in the affirmative and the second question is answered in the negative, the following question is referred to the Court: within the meaning of the provisions of Directive 2003/88/EC (including, in particular, Article 2(1) and other provisions), must the passive on-call duty of officers of the public prosecutor’s office be considered working time in the light of the restrictions to which an officer of the public prosecutor’s office on passive on-call duty is subject on account of the tasks and responsibilities that the officer performs during passive on-call duty pursuant to the Opća uputa Državnog odvjetništva Republike Hrvatske o radu službe dežurstva (General recommendations of the National Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Croatia concerning on-call duty) No 0–8/11–1 of 13 October 2011, as amended on 12 October 2012, and pursuant to the Zakon o kaznenom postupku (Code of Criminal Procedure) (Narodne novine Nos 152/08, 76/09, 80/11, 121/11, 91/12, 143/12, 56/13, 145/13, 152/14, 70/17, 126/19, 80/22 and 36/24), under which an officer of the public prosecutor’s office, as a worker, is significantly restricted in his or her ability to perform other activities despite the fact that under the abovementioned general recommendations of the employer, he or she is obliged to perform tasks within the framework of passive on-call duty at his or her home?










3. (b)


If the first question is answered in the affirmative and the second question is answered in the negative, the following question is referred to the Court: within the meaning of the provisions of Directive 2003/88/EC concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time (including, in particular, Article 2(1) and other provisions), must the active on-call duty of officers of the public prosecutor’s office be considered working time on account of the tasks and responsibilities that the officer performs during active on-call duty pursuant to the General recommendations of the National Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Croatia concerning on-call duty No 0–8/11–1 of 13 October 2011, as amended on 12 October 2012, and pursuant to the Code of Criminal Procedure, under which an officer of the public prosecutor’s office performs tasks within the framework of active on-call duty (inspections and other tasks) at his or her usual place of work or at another location determined by the employer?






(1)  The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any party to the proceedings.

(2)  Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time (OJ 2003 L 299, p. 9.)

(3)  Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work (OJ 1989 L 183, p. 1.)


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/5493/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)