Case C‑222/14

Konstantinos Maïstrellis

v

Ypourgos Dikaiosynis, Diafaneias kai Anthropinon Dikaiomaton

(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Symvoulio tis Epikrateias)

(References for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 96/34/EC — Framework agreement on parental leave — Clause 2.1— Individual right to parental leave on the grounds of the birth of a child — National legislation denying the right to such leave for a staff member whose wife does not work — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation — Articles 2(1)(a) and 14(1)(c) — Working conditions — Direct discrimination)

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber), 16 July 2015

1.        Questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Jurisdiction of the Court — Limits — Jurisdiction of the national court — Establishing and assessing the facts of the dispute — Necessity of a question referred and relevance of the questions raised — Assessment by the national court

(Art. 267 TFEU)

2.        EU law — Interpretation — Methods — Literal, contextual, historical and teleological interpretation — Purpose and general scheme of the measure in question

(Council Directive 96/34, as amended by Directive 97/75, Annex, clauses 1 and 2)

3.        Social policy — Male and female workers — Access to employment and working conditions — Equal treatment — Framework Agreement on parental leave concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP — Directive 96/34 — National legislation denying an official the right to parental leave where his wife does not exercise a profession, unless the wife is unable to meet the needs related to the upbringing of the child due to a serious illness or injury — Unlawful

(Council Directive 2006/54, Arts 2(1((a), and 14(1)(c); Council Directive 96/34, as amended by Directive 97/75, Annex, clauses 1 and 2]

1.        See the text of the decision.

(see paras 26, 27)

2.        See the text of the decision.

(see paras 30, 37)

3.        The provisions of Council Directive 96/34 on the framework agreement on parental leave concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC, as amended by Directive 97/75 (‘the Framework Agreement’), and Directive 2006/54 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation under which a civil servant is not entitled to parental leave in a situation where his wife does not work or exercise any profession, unless it is considered that due to a serious illness or injury the wife is unable to meet the needs related to the upbringing of the child.

First, it follows from the wording of the Framework Agreement and from its objectives and context that each parent is entitled to parental leave, which means that Member States adopt cannot such legislation. Secondly, those provisions constitute direct discrimination on grounds of sex, within the meaning of Article 14(1) of Directive 2006/54, read in conjunction with Article 2(1)(a) of that directive, in respect of fathers who are civil servants, as regards the granting of parental leave.

(see paras 41, 52, 53, operative part)