CELEX: 62015CN0184
Language: en
Date: 2015-04-23 00:00:00
Title: Case C-184/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de la Comunidad Autónoma del País Vasco (Spain) lodged on 23 April 2015 — Florentina Martínez Andrés v Servicio Vasco de Salud

20.7.2015   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 236/25
            
         Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de la Comunidad Autónoma del País Vasco (Spain) lodged on 23 April 2015 — Florentina Martínez Andrés v Servicio Vasco de Salud
   (Case C-184/15)
   (2015/C 236/34)
   Language of the case: Spanish
   
      Referring court
   
   Tribunal Superior de Justicia de la Comunidad Autónoma del País Vasco
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Appellant: Florentina Martínez Andrés
   
      Respondent: Servicio Vasco de Salud
   
      Questions referred
   
   
               1.
            
            
               Must clause 5(1) of the Framework Agreement (1) on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP be interpreted as precluding national legislation which, in a situation of abuse arising from the use of fixed-term employment contracts, does not acknowledge that staff regulated under administrative law who are engaged on an occasional basis (personal estatutario temporal eventual) (‘occasional regulated staff’), as opposed to staff who are in precisely the same position but who are employed by a public authority under contract, have a general right to remain in post on an indefinite but not permanent basis, in other words, to hold the temporary post until it is filled in the manner prescribed by law or eliminated in accordance with legally established procedures?
            
         
               2.
            
            
               If the previous question is answered in the negative, must the principle of equivalence be interpreted as meaning that the national court may regard the situation of staff who are employed by a public authority under a fixed-term contract and that of occasional regulated staff as similar in cases where there has been misuse of fixed-term employment contracts, or, when assessing similarity, must the national court consider factors other than the fact that the employer is the same, the services provided are the same or similar and the contract of employment has a fixed term, such as the precise nature of the employee’s relationship, whether contractual or regulated, or the power of the public authorities to organise the way they function, which justify treating the two situations differently?
            
         
      (1)  Annex to Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 (OJ 1999 L 175, p. 43).