CELEX: 62012CA0361
Language: en
Date: 2013-12-12 00:00:00
Title: Case C-361/12: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 12 December 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Napoli — Italy) — Carmela Carratù v Poste Italiane SpA (Social policy — Directive 1999/70/EC — Framework agreement on fixed-term work — Principle of non-discrimination — Employment conditions — National legislation establishing a system of compensation for the unlawful insertion of a fixed-term clause into an employment contract which is different from that applicable to the unlawful termination of an employment contract of indefinite duration)

22.2.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 52/16
            
         Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 12 December 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Napoli — Italy) — Carmela Carratù v Poste Italiane SpA
   (Case C-361/12) (1)
   
   (Social policy - Directive 1999/70/EC - Framework agreement on fixed-term work - Principle of non-discrimination - Employment conditions - National legislation establishing a system of compensation for the unlawful insertion of a fixed-term clause into an employment contract which is different from that applicable to the unlawful termination of an employment contract of indefinite duration)
   2014/C 52/25
   Language of the case: Italian
   
      Referring court
   
   Tribunale di Napoli
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Applicant: Carmela Carratù
   
      Defendant: Poste Italiane SpA
   
      Re:
   
   Request for a preliminary ruling — Tribunale di Napoli — Interpretation of Clause 4 of the framework agreement set out in Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP (OJ 1999 L 175, p 43) — Scope — Concept of ‘working conditions’ — Horizontal applicability of that directive — Concept of ‘State body’ — Interpretation of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Article 6 ECHR — Principle of equivalence — National legislation establishing a system of compensation for the unlawful insertion of a fixed-term clause into an employment contract providing for comprehensive compensation ranging from 2.5 to 12 months’ actual full pay for the period from the interruption of the employment relations until the date of actual reinstatement — Compensation lower than either the compensation provided for under the ordinary civil law in the event of unjustified refusal to accept work or the compensation provided for in the event of unlawful termination of an employment contract of indefinite duration.
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   
               1.
            
            
               Clause 4(1) of the Framework agreement on fixed-term work, 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 as meaning that it may be relied on directly against a State body such as Poste Italiane SpA.
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Clause 4(1) of the framework agreement on fixed-term work must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of ‘employment conditions’ covers the compensation that the employer must pay to an employee on account of the unlawful insertion of a fixed-term clause into his employment contract.
            
         
               3.
            
            
               While that framework agreement does not preclude Member States from granting fixed-term workers more favourable treatment than that provided for by the framework agreement, clause 4(1) of the framework agreement must be interpreted as not requiring the compensation paid in respect of the unlawful insertion of a fixed-term clause into an employment relationship to be treated in the same way as that paid in respect of the unlawful termination of a permanent employment relationship.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 295, 29.9.2012.