ACCORDING TO THE COURT'S JUDGMENT, AN EMPLOYEE EMPLOYED FOR A FIXED PERIOD MUST BE INFORMED OF THE REASONS FOR THE TERMINATION OF HIS CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT BY GIVING NOTICE, IF THE PROVISION OF THIS INFORMATION IS REQUIRED IN THE CASE OF A PERMANENT EMPLOYEE

#110According to the Court's judgment, an employee employed for a fixed period must be informed of the reasons for the termination of his contract of employment by giving notice, if the provision of this information is required in the case of a permanent employee

A court in Poland heard a dispute between an employee who was employed under a fixed-term employment contract concluded between him and his former employer. The employer terminated the employee's employment agreement by giving notice without informing the employee of the reasons for its decision.

As the employee was not informed of the reasons for the termination of his employment agreement, he considered that it was an unlawful decision in breach of the principle of non-discrimination, which is contrary not only to Polish law but also to European Union law. For that reason, the employee brought an action before the courts in Poland.

The Court in Poland referred to the Court of Justice the question of whether there is a difference in the requirements for termination of employment depending on the type of employment contract and whether they are compatible with the fixed-term employment agreement.

In the Judgment, the Court stated that if an employee who has a fixed-term contract of employment does not receive information about the reasons for the termination of his employment agreement, or is deprived of information relevant to the assessment of his termination of employment, he does not have information in advance which could be decisive as to whether or not to bring an action for unlawful termination of his employment relationship.

The Court further held that there was a breach of the principle of non-discrimination on the ground that the temporary nature of the employment relationship must not be a reason for less favourable treatment of fixed-term employees. Polish law introduces a difference in treatment to the detriment of fixed-term workers.

However, the national courts have jurisdiction to ascertain whether, in the present case, the fixed-term employee is in a situation comparable to that of a worker employed for an indefinite period by the same employer.

For that reason, the national court is required to give full effect to European Union law, but is not required to exclude the application of a national provision on the sole ground that it is contrary to the Framework Agreement.

In conclusion, we submit that the disparate treatment in question infringes not only the principle of non-discrimination but also the right to an effective remedy guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. For that reason, the national court is under an obligation not to apply national legislation in order to ensure the full effect of European Union law.