Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Social No 2 de Terrassa (Spain) lodged on 22 February 2017 — Gardenia Vernaza Ayovi v Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa

(Case C-96/17)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Social No 2 de Terrassa

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Gardenia Vernaza Ayovi

Defendant: Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa

Questions referred

1.    Is the remedy provided by the legal system when a disciplinary dismissal is held to be unlawful and, in particular, the remedy under Article 96(2) of the Real Decreto Legislativo 5/2015 (Royal Legislative Decree 5/2015) of 30 October approving the consolidated text of the Ley del Estatuto Básico del Empleado Público (Law on the basic regulations relating to public servants), to be regarded as covered by the concept of ‘employment conditions’ under Clause 4(1) of Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work ¹ concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP?

2.    Would a situation, such as that provided for in Article 96(2) of the Real Decreto Legislativo 5/2015 (Royal Legislative Decree 5/2015) of 30 October approving the consolidated text of the Ley del Estatuto Básico del Empleado Público (Law on the basic regulations relating to public servants), in which the disciplinary dismissal of a permanent worker, when that dismissal is held to be wrongful, that is to say unlawful, always requires the reinstatement of the worker, but when the worker is subject to an indefinite or temporary contract performing the same duties as a permanent worker permits that worker not to be reinstated in return for compensation, be discriminatory under Clause 4(1) of Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP?

3.    Would unequal treatment be justified in the same situation as in the question above, not in the light of the Directive but of Article 20 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?

____________

¹ OJ 1999, L 175, p. 43.