{"title":"FN诉安特卫普大学:对有效性和时间比例原则的冷遇","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":"{\"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}","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}
FN v. Universiteit Antwerpen: The cold shoulder on the principles of effet utile and pro rata temporis
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.