Case T-552/24: Action brought on 25 October 2024 – Lami v Frontex
Date: 2024-10-25
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: arrangement of working time, equal treatment, labour standard, occupational safety, paid leave, servant (EU), shift work, staff regulations (EU)








C_202500088EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/88


6.1.2025






Action brought on 25 October 2024 – Lami v Frontex


(Case T-552/24)

(C/2025/88)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Johan Lami (Pescara, Italy) (represented by: F. Bello, A. Bonanni Caione, F. D’Onofrio and G. Borrelli, lawyers)

Defendant: European Border and Coast Guard Agency

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the measure taken by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) on 29 July 2024 (HRS/HR/2024) and, consequently, find that Frontex infringed the rules in force in the field of annual leave;










—


Annul the decisions of 8 November 2023, 22 January 2024 and of 14 February 2024 in so far as those decisions deducted more days’ leave from his quota than he did in fact take;










—


Order Frontex to restore to the applicant the number of days’ leave which were wrongfully deducted from his quota;










—


In the alternative, in the event that Frontex challenges the applicant’s calculations of the number of days’ leave owed to the applicant, order that an expert be appointed.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of Directive 2003/88/EC (1) and of Frontex Management Board Decision 27/2023
By the first plea in law, the applicant alleges both an infringement of Directive 2003/88/EC in so far as it establishes the right of workers to enjoy a minimum period of paid annual leave that is equal to at least four weeks, and of Decision 27/2023 of the Management of Board of Frontex which implements Article 55 of the Staff Regulations in so far as it provides that leave is to be adjusted in the context of part-time and flexitime work.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringements of regulations
By the second plea in law, the applicant alleges misapplication of Article 57 of Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC) (2) laying down the Staff Regulations of Officials, since Frontex failed to grant the applicant 24 days’ annual leave, as provided for in that regulation. Specifically, Frontex’s management of annual leave infringes the rules laid down in those provisions, in that, applying the calculation method used by Frontex, Mr Lami would be granted only 16 days’ leave rather than the 24 provided for in that regulation.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging infringement of health and safety rules
The applicant claims that health and safety rules have been infringed in view of the fact that the right to leave is one of the few rights that is regarded as absolute in the context of industrial relations. That is particularly the case given that the employer is required to ensure that the worker take paid annual leave by inviting him or her – including, where necessary, by formal written notice – to use such leave in good time so as to ensure that it is suitable to give the worker the rest and relaxation that it is intended to provide. It is especially necessary given that Mr Lami works 12-hour shifts and is therefore subject to a greater workload then those who work 8-hour shifts.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging failure to observe the principles of equal treatment and of transparency
The applicant alleges a failure to observe the principles of equal treatment and of transparency enshrined in Directive 2000/78/EC (3) and Directive (EU) 2019/1152. (4) Specifically, the calculation methods used by Frontex both fail to observe equal treatment (those who works shifts that are shorter than 8 hours long actually have more leave than those who work 12-hour shifts) and undermine transparency regarding the working conditions of Frontex’s shift workers, who experience different, unforeseeable treatment as a result of the misapplication of the provisions governing the calculation of leave.






(1)  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)

(2)  Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC) laying down the Staff Regulations of Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Economic Community and the European Atomic Energy Community (OJ, English Special Edition, Series I Volume 1959-1962, p. 135).

(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).

(4)  Directive (EU) 2019/1152 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on transparent and predictable working conditions in the European Union (OJ 2019 L 186, p. 105).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/88/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)