FN v. Universiteit Antwerpen: The cold shoulder on the principles of effet utile and pro rata temporis

Q2 Social Sciences
A. Aranguiz
{"title":"FN v. Universiteit Antwerpen: The cold shoulder on the principles of effet utile and pro rata temporis","authors":"A. Aranguiz","doi":"10.1177/1023263X221130465","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In May 2022, the CJEU delivered the judgment FN v. Universiteit Antwerpen, dealing with the interpretation of the Framework Agreements on fixed-term and part-time work in higher education. This contribution studies the Court's position on the four referred questions and provides a critical analysis of its reasoning. It finds, first and foremost, that a poor legal phrasing by the referring court and the lack of substance provided by the claimant weakened the position of the applicant and the possibility of receiving better protection from the directives. Nevertheless, the analysils also finds that the Court failed to see this case in light of important and well-established principles of EU law, particularly regarding the principle of pro rata temporis and effectiveness of EU law. It shows that this (lack of) interpretation by the Court undermines an already flawed protection of the directives and fails to shield a growing group of atypical workers from increasingly precarious labour patterns.","PeriodicalId":39672,"journal":{"name":"Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law","volume":"29 1","pages":"615 - 628"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X221130465","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In May 2022, the CJEU delivered the judgment FN v. Universiteit Antwerpen, dealing with the interpretation of the Framework Agreements on fixed-term and part-time work in higher education. This contribution studies the Court's position on the four referred questions and provides a critical analysis of its reasoning. It finds, first and foremost, that a poor legal phrasing by the referring court and the lack of substance provided by the claimant weakened the position of the applicant and the possibility of receiving better protection from the directives. Nevertheless, the analysils also finds that the Court failed to see this case in light of important and well-established principles of EU law, particularly regarding the principle of pro rata temporis and effectiveness of EU law. It shows that this (lack of) interpretation by the Court undermines an already flawed protection of the directives and fails to shield a growing group of atypical workers from increasingly precarious labour patterns.
FN诉安特卫普大学:对有效性和时间比例原则的冷遇
2022年5月,欧盟法院作出了FN诉安特卫普大学的判决,涉及对高等教育定期和非全日制工作框架协议的解释。这篇文章研究了法院对所提及的四个问题的立场,并对其推理进行了批判性分析。它认为,首先也是最重要的一点是,提交法院的法律措辞不当,索赔人缺乏实质内容,削弱了申请人的地位,也削弱了从指令中获得更好保护的可能性。然而,分析还发现,法院未能根据欧盟法律的重要和既定原则,特别是关于按时间比例原则和欧盟法律的有效性来看待此案。它表明,法院的这种(缺乏)解释破坏了对指令本已存在缺陷的保护,并未能保护越来越多的非典型工人免受日益不稳定的劳动模式的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信