GENERAL NOTICE

In January 2025, this online platform will be integrated into Boomportaal (www.boomportaal.nl), after which this platform will be discontinued. From that moment on, this URL will automatically redirect to Boomportaal.

DOI: 10.5553/EELC/187791072022007002026

European Employment Law CasesAccess_open

Pending Cases

Case C-132/22, Free Movement

BM, NP – v – Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca, reference lodged by the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) on 25 February 2022

Keywords Free Movement
DOI
Show PDF Show fullscreen
Statistics Citation
This article has been viewed times.
This article been downloaded 0 times.
Suggested citation
, "Case C-132/22, Free Movement", European Employment Law Cases, 2, (2022):111-111

Dit artikel wordt geciteerd in

      Must Article 45(1) and (2) TFEU and Article 3(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 be interpreted as precluding a rule, such as that laid down in Article 1(655) of Law No 205/2017, according to which, in order to take part in the procedure for inclusion on the lists compiled for the award of permanent and temporary teaching contracts in Italian AFAM institutions, professional experience gained by candidates at those national institutions alone is taken into account, and not experience gained at peer institutions in other European countries, given that the procedure in question is specifically intended to counter the phenomenon of precarious employment in Italy? If the Court of Justice does not hold the Italian legislation to be contrary, in abstract terms, to the European regulatory framework, can the measures envisaged by that legislation be regarded as proportionate, in concrete terms, in view of the abovementioned public-interest objective?


Print this article