Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 2 April 2024 – NR v Ministero della Difesa, Comando Generale dell’Arma dei Carabinieri, Comando Generale Carabinieri – Centro Nazionale Amministrativo – Chieti, Centro Amministrativo d’Intendenza Interforze del Contingente delle Forze Armate Italiane in Afghanistan, Centro Nazionale Amministrativo dell’Arma dei Carabinieri

(Case C-238/24, Tartisai) ¹

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: NR

Respondents: Ministero della Difesa, Comando Generale dell’Arma dei Carabinieri, Comando Generale Carabinieri – Centro Nazionale Amministrativo – Chieti, Centro Amministrativo d’Intendenza Interforze del Contingente delle Forze Armate Italiane in Afghanistan, Centro Nazionale Amministrativo dell’Arma dei Carabinieri

Questions referred

What is the correct interpretation of Article 7(3) of Council Decision 2010/279/CFSP of 18 May 2010, ¹ that is to say, was the intention behind that provision to provide that allowances paid by a Member State were to be received cumulatively with those granted by EUPOL?

In the event that that interpretation leads to the conclusion that the allowances described above can be received cumulatively, according to the interpretation provided by the Court referred to above, does Article 7(3) of Council Decision 2010/279/CFSP of 18 May 2010 preclude a national rule, such as the rule resulting from the provisions of Article 3(1) of legge n. 108/2009 (Law No 108/2009), in so far as it provides that ‘… the staff involved in the international missions referred to in this law shall be paid, after tax and social security deductions, throughout the period, in addition to salary or pay and other fixed and continuous allowances, the mission allowance provided for by regio decreto n. 941 (Royal Decree No 941) of 3 June 1926, … less any allowances and contributions paid on the same basis directly to the persons concerned by international bodies’, and by Article 1(b) of Royal Decree No 941 of 3 June 1926 and Article 3 of legge n. 642 (Law No 642) of 8 July 1961 and Article 4(1)(a) of legge n. 838 (Law No 838) of 27 December 1973, the purpose of that rule being to prohibit the cumulation of allowances?

____________

¹     The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any party to the proceedings.

¹     Council Decision 2010/279/CFSP of 18 May 2010 on the European Union Police Mission in Afghanistan (EUPOL AFGHANISTAN) (OJ 2010 L 123, p. 4).