Published on 12 February 2024
SECOND SECTION
Application no. 43200/22
Gojislav DRAŽENOVIĆ
against Croatia
lodged on 2 September 2022
communicated on 26 January 2024
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns alleged discrimination of the applicant on account of his civil servant status.
In 2003 the applicant was employed as a civil servant on a temporary basis in the Zagreb Municipal Civil Court. His employment in the civil service was regularly extended until its termination on 31 March 2016.
The applicant challenged the termination of his civil service relying on Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP. The purpose of the Directive is, inter alia, to prevent abuse arising from the use of successive fixed-term employment relationships. He also relied on the relevant provision of the Croatian Labour Act providing that all fixed-term employment contracts automatically became employment contracts of indefinite duration after three years. He submitted that by that provision Croatia had transposed the Directive in question into domestic law.
In the ensuing proceedings the domestic administrative and judicial authorities all ruled against the applicant. They held that the Labour Act applied to civil servants only as regards matters not regulated by the Civil Servants Act, and that the latter Act expressly prohibited conversion of temporary civil service into a permanent one. They also held that they were not entitled to apply the Directive in question directly and to disregard the contrary domestic provision.
The applicant complains under Article 1 of Protocol No. 12 to the Convention that, compared to other employees, he was discriminated against on account of his civil servant status regarding the possibility of converting his fixed-term employment relationship into one of indefinite duration.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Has the applicant suffered discrimination on the ground of his civil servant status in the enjoyment of his rights of equal access to public service and of equal access to employment guaranteed by Articles 44 and 54 § 2 of the Croatian Constitution, contrary to Article 1 of Protocol No. 12 to the Convention?
2. In particular, were civil servants in a relevantly similar situation as other employees for the purposes of conversion of their fixed-term employment relationships into those of indefinite duration? If so, did the difference in treatment between civil servants and other employees regarding conversion of fixed-term employment relationships into those of indefinite duration pursue a legitimate aim, and did it have a reasonable justification, having regard to Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work?