# C_2011145EN.01000702.xml

| 14.5.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 145/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.5.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 145/7

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hessisches Landessozialgericht, Darmstadt (Germany) lodged on 10 February 2011 — Florence Feyerbacher v Land Hessen, represented by the Regierungspräsidium Gießen

(Case C-62/11)

2011/C 145/09

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Hessisches Landessozialgericht, Darmstadt

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Florence Feyerbacher

Applicant:

Defendant: Land Hessen, represented by the Regierungspräsidium Gießen (Regional Administration, Gießen)

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Is the Agreement of 18 September 1998 between the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany and the European Central Bank (ECB) on the Headquarters of the ECB (‘Headquarters Agreement’) part of European Union law which takes precedence over national law or does it constitute an international treaty? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is the Agreement of 18 September 1998 between the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany and the European Central Bank (ECB) on the Headquarters of the ECB (‘Headquarters Agreement’) part of European Union law which takes precedence over national law or does it constitute an international treaty?

| 2. | Must Article 15 of the Headquarters Agreement in conjunction with Article 36 of the Statute of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB) and the ECB be interpreted restrictively with the result that the applicability of German social security law conferring the benefit in question is excluded only where pursuant to the ‘Conditions of Employment’ the ECB confers a comparable social benefit on its staff? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Must Article 15 of the Headquarters Agreement in conjunction with Article 36 of the Statute of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB) and the ECB be interpreted restrictively with the result that the applicability of German social security law conferring the benefit in question is excluded only where pursuant to the ‘Conditions of Employment’ the ECB confers a comparable social benefit on its staff?

If Question 2 is answered in the negative:

| (a) | Must the abovementioned provisions be interpreted as meaning that they preclude the application of a national provision which grants family benefits only on the basis of the territorial principle? |
| --- | --- |

(a)

Must the abovementioned provisions be interpreted as meaning that they preclude the application of a national provision which grants family benefits only on the basis of the territorial principle?

| (b) | Is the reasoning of the Court of Justice in Case C-352/06 Bosmann [2008] ECR I-3827, paragraphs 31 to 33, relevant to the application of the abovementioned provisions? Does Article 15 of the Headquarters Agreement in conjunction with Article 36 of the Statute of the ESCB and ECB not deprive the Federal Republic of Germany of the power to grant family benefits to employees of the ECB resident in Germany? |
| --- | --- |

(b)

Is the reasoning of the Court of Justice in Case C-352/06 Bosmann [2008] ECR I-3827, paragraphs 31 to 33, relevant to the application of the abovementioned provisions? Does Article 15 of the Headquarters Agreement in conjunction with Article 36 of the Statute of the ESCB and ECB not deprive the Federal Republic of Germany of the power to grant family benefits to employees of the ECB resident in Germany?

Bosmann

---