Published on 11 May 2026
FIFTH SECTION
Application no. 21467/25
Maria Teresa MATEOS BLANCO
against Spain
lodged on 10 July 2025
communicated on 23 April 2026
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns a difference in the allowances received by different types of teachers in Extremadura.
The applicant is a teacher in a public technical school (formación profesional). Apart from teaching, she also performs functions as a form tutor (tutora).
In 2021 she claimed an allowance to compensate her role as a form tutor. She argued that this role was equivalent to the same performed by teachers in public secondary schools in Extremadura, who were entitled to that allowance.
On 31 March 2023 the first instance court rejected her claim on the grounds that secondary school teachers and technical teachers belonged to different job categories and that even if their functions were comparable, the difference in treatment regarding the allowance was justified and not discriminatory. The court of appeal upheld the judgment. The appeal on points of law was declared inadmissible on 18 December 2024.
On 27 March 2025 the Constitutional Court declared the amparo appeal inadmissible.
The applicant complains that the refusal of the allowance sought amounts to discrimination with regard to equivalent categories of professionals. She relies on Article 14 of the Convention in conjunction with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention.
She further complains under Article 6 of the Convention that the domestic courts’ judgments were unreasonable and lacked motivation because they had not duly compared the functions carried out by technical teachers and secondary school teachers.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of her civil rights and obligations, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, did the domestic courts provide adequate reasons for their decisions?
2. Has the applicant raised in substance a complaint under Article 1 of Protocol No. 12 of the Convention?
3. Did the applicant suffer discrimination on account of her type of employment as a teacher of a technical public school, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention linked with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 or contrary to Article 1 of Protocol No. 12, insofar as the domestic courts denied her a form tutor’s allowance although the same is available to teachers of secondary public schools (see, Pinkas and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, no. 8701/21, §§ 52-64, 4 October 2022)? In particular, was the applicant subjected to a difference in treatment in relation to the other teachers in secondary public schools in Extremadura? If so, did that difference in treatment pursue a legitimate aim and have a reasonable justification?
4. The Government is requested to provide information on whether teachers at technical public schools and/or secondary school teachers in other regions of the State (Comunidades Autónomas) are entitled to complements in their salary for performing functions as form tutors and, in that case, whether there are differences in the attribution of these allowances to both types of teachers.