EN
7.3.2022
Official Journal of the European Union
C 109/3
Intervener in support of the appellant: European Automobile Manufacturers Association (represented by: F. Di Gianni and G. Coppo, avvocati) Operative part of the judgment The Court: 1.
Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 13 December 2018, Ville de Paris, Ville de Bruxelles and Ayuntamiento de Madrid v Commission (T-339/16, T-352/16 and T-391/16, EU:T:2018:927); 2.
Dismisses as inadmissible the actions for annulment in Joined Cases T-339/16, T-352/16 and T-391/16, brought, respectively, by the ville de Paris, the ville de Bruxelles and the ayuntamiento de Madrid; 3.
Orders each party to bear its own costs relating to the appeals; 4.
Orders the ville de Paris, the ville de Bruxelles and the ayuntamiento de Madrid to pay, in addition to their own costs relating to the proceedings at first instance and the appeals, the costs incurred by the European Commission in relation to proceedings at first instance.
(1)
OJ C 155, 6.5.2019.
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 13 January 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Napoli — Italy) — YT and Others v Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca — MIUR, Ufficio Scolastico Regionale per la Campania (Case C-282/19) (1) (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 1999/70/EC — Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP — Clauses 4 and 5 — Fixed-term employment contracts in the public sector — Catholic religious education teachers — Concept of ‘objective reasons’ justifying the renewal of such contracts — Permanent need for replacement staff) (2022/C 109/03) Language of the case: Italian Referring court Tribunale di Napoli Parties to the main proceedings Applicants: YT, ZU, AW, BY, CX, DZ, EA, FB, GC, IE, JF, KG, LH, MI, NY, PL, HD, OK Defendants: Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca — MIUR, Ufficio Scolastico Regionale per la Campania Intervener: Federazione GILDA-UNAMS Operative part of the judgment Clause 5 of the framework agreement on fixed-term work, concluded on 18 March 1999, which is annexed 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, first, as precluding national legislation excluding Catholic religious education teachers in public education establishments from the scope of the rules intended to penalise abuse arising from the use of successive fixed-term contracts where there is no other effective measure in the domestic legal system penalising that abuse and, second, as meaning that the requirement to hold a suitability certificate issued by an ecclesiastical authority for the purposes of allowing those teachers to provide Catholic religious education does not constitute an ‘objective reason’ within the meaning of Clause 5(1)(a) of the framework agreement, because that certificate is issued once and not before each school year leading to the conclusion of a fixed-term employment contract.
(1)
OJ C 206, 17.6.2019.