Case C-369/25, Trenitalia and INPS: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Napoli (Italy) lodged on 3 June 2025 – LW v Trenitalia SpA, Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS)
Date: 2025-06-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: compulsory insurance, dismissal, labour law, pension scheme, retirement conditions, social-security contribution, temporary employment, work contract, worker information








C_202504143EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/4143


4.8.2025






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Napoli (Italy) lodged on 3 June 2025 – LW v Trenitalia SpA, Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS)


(Case C-369/25, Trenitalia and INPS)

(C/2025/4143)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Napoli

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: LW

Defendants: Trenitalia SpA, Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS)

Questions referred







1.


Do the rights referred to in Article 8 of Directive 91/533/EEC, (1) the protection of which must be ensured by a Member State, consist only of the right to receive the document pursuant to which a worker is recruited referred to in Article 2 of that directive, or also of the rights which must be set out in the document itself and, in particular, the right to remuneration?










2.


If the Court of Justice answers the first question in the affirmative, does the pension which the applicant will receive, in the context described above, which is dependent on contributions paid in proportion to the remuneration received and the years of affiliation to the compulsory general insurance scheme, constitute, for members in the private sector, remuneration, within the meaning of Article 2 of Directive 91/533/EEC, that is deferred?










3.


If the answer to the first two questions is in the affirmative, does the worker’s right to the payment of contributions, which has a decisive influence on the right to and the amount of the pension benefit, also come within the scope of protection provided for in Article 8 of Directive 91/533/EEC?










4.


If the answer to the questions above is in the affirmative, does Article 8 of Directive 91/533/EEC preclude a worker from being required, in the course of the employment relationship, to bring proceedings against the employer, in addition to the INPS, to seek payment of contributions, in order to prevent his or her claims from becoming time-barred, where those claims depend exclusively on the willingness of the INPS to join the proceedings and to request payment of the amount owed, unlike in the case of ordinary remuneration, even where the worker does not have sufficient protection against unfair dismissal, thereby risking dismissal or non-continuation of the employment relationship protected by Directive 2008/104/EC? (2)











5.


If the answer to the questions above is in the affirmative, what instruments are available to the referring court and, in the present case, can the harmonisation of the rules on limitation periods for contributions and remuneration be regarded as a measure that is sufficient to discharge the obligations laid down in Article 8 of Directive 91/533/EEC?






(1)  Council Directive 91/533/EEC of 14 October 1991 on an employer's obligation to inform employees of the conditions applicable to the contract or employment relationship (OJ 1991 L 288, p. 32).

(2)  Directive 2008/104/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on temporary agency work (OJ 2008 L 327, p. 9).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/4143/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)