EN
C 207/18
Official Journal of the European Union
23.5.2022
Sixth, the General Court misapplied the law on sufficiently serious breach in concluding there was no grave and manifest error in connection with the Commission’s breach of the fundamental principles of sound administration and/or to act diligently; Seventh, the General Court misapplied the law on sufficiently serious breach in concluding there was no grave and manifest error in connection with the Commission’s breach of the fundamental principle of the right to pursue a trade or business.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 25 February 2022 — BM, NP v Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca (Case C-132/22) (2022/C 207/25) Language of the case: Italian Referring court Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio Parties to the main proceedings Applicants: BM, NP Defendant: Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca Question referred Must Article 45(1) and (2) TFEU and Article 3(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 (1) be interpreted as precluding a rule, such as that laid down in Article 1(655) of Law No 205/2017, according to which, in order to take part in the procedure for inclusion on the lists compiled for the award of permanent and temporary teaching contracts in Italian AFAM institutions, professional experience gained by candidates at those national institutions alone is taken into account, and not experience gained at peer institutions in other European countries, given that the procedure in question is specifically intended to counter the phenomenon of precarious employment in Italy?
If the Court of Justice does not hold the Italian legislation to be contrary, in abstract terms, to the European regulatory framework, can the measures envisaged by that legislation be regarded as proportionate, in concrete terms, in view of the abovementioned public-interest objective?
(1)
Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on freedom of movement for workers within the Union (OJ 2011 L 141, p. 1).
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 1 March 2022 — Association Avocats pour la défense des droits des étrangers (ADDE) and Others v Ministre de l’Intérieur (Case C-143/22) (2022/C 207/26) Language of the case: French Referring court Conseil d’État Parties to the main proceedings Applicants: Association Avocats pour la défense des droits des étrangers (ADDE), Association nationale d’assistance aux frontières pour les étrangers (ANAFE), Association de recherche, de communication et d’action pour l’accès aux traitements (ARCAT), Comité inter-mouvements auprès des évacués (CIMADE), Fédération des associations de solidarité avec tou-te-s les immigré-e-s (FASTI), Groupe d’information et de soutien des immigré.e.s (GISTI), Ligue des droits de l’homme (LDH), Le Paria, Syndicat des avocats de France (SAF), SOS — Hépatites Fédération Defendant: Ministre de l’Intérieur