This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62014CN0238
Case C-238/14: Action brought on 13 May 2014 — European Commission v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg
Case C-238/14: Action brought on 13 May 2014 — European Commission v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg
Case C-238/14: Action brought on 13 May 2014 — European Commission v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg
OJ C 235, 21.7.2014, p. 10–11
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
21.7.2014 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 235/10 |
Action brought on 13 May 2014 — European Commission v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg
(Case C-238/14)
2014/C 235/14
Language of the case: French
Parties
Applicant: European Commission (represented by: J. Enegren and D, Martin, acting as Agents)
Defendant: Grand Duchy of Luxembourg
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
|
— |
declare that, by maintaining in force derogations from the measures aimed at preventing abuse of successive fixed-term contracts concluded with occasional entertainment workers, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under Clause 5 of the Annex to Council Directive 1999/70/EC concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP (1); |
|
— |
order Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
By maintaining in force derogations from the measures aimed at preventing abuse of successive fixed-term contracts concluded with occasional entertainment workers, Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under Clause 5 of the framework agreement.
The Commission considers that, for that category of workers, Luxembourg law does not provide for any objective reason allowing for the prevention of abuse of successive fixed-term contracts, contrary to Clause 5(1)(a) of the Annex to the framework agreement in question.