# C_2008079EN.01001501.xml

| 29.3.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 79/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.3.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/15

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal du travail de Nivelles (Belgium) lodged on 8 January 2008 — Ketty Leyman v Institut national d'assurance maladie-invalidité (I.N.A.M.I.)

(Case C-3/08)

(2008/C 79/27)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal du travail de Nivelles

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ketty Leyman

Applicant:

Defendant: Institut national d'assurance maladie-invalidité (I.N.A.M.I.)

Defendant:

Questions referred

| 1. | Are Article 40(3)(b) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 (1) and Article 93 of the Consolidated Laws of 14 July 1994 on medical care and sickness insurance benefit contrary to Article 18 of the EC Treaty in that, where a worker lives and works in a type A country (in this case, Belgium) and moves to a type B country (in this case, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg), they do not permit, during the first year of incapacity for work, the grant of an allowance that takes into account the length of time worked and the period of contribution in the type A country (Belgium)? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Are Article 40(3)(b) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 (1) and Article 93 of the Consolidated Laws of 14 July 1994 on medical care and sickness insurance benefit contrary to Article 18 of the EC Treaty in that, where a worker lives and works in a type A country (in this case, Belgium) and moves to a type B country (in this case, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg), they do not permit, during the first year of incapacity for work, the grant of an allowance that takes into account the length of time worked and the period of contribution in the type A country (Belgium)?

1

| 2. | Are Article 40(3)(b) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 and Article 93 of the Consolidated Laws of 14 July 1994 on medical care and sickness insurance benefit contrary to Article 18 of the EC Treaty in that, where a worker lives and works in a type A country (in this case, Belgium) and moves to a type B country (in this case, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg), they give rise to discrimination to the detriment of a worker exercising her right of free movement in not permitting the grant to her, during the first year of incapacity for work, of an allowance that takes into account the length of time worked and the period of contribution in the type A country (Belgium)? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Are Article 40(3)(b) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 and Article 93 of the Consolidated Laws of 14 July 1994 on medical care and sickness insurance benefit contrary to Article 18 of the EC Treaty in that, where a worker lives and works in a type A country (in this case, Belgium) and moves to a type B country (in this case, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg), they give rise to discrimination to the detriment of a worker exercising her right of free movement in not permitting the grant to her, during the first year of incapacity for work, of an allowance that takes into account the length of time worked and the period of contribution in the type A country (Belgium)?

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community (OJ 1971 L 149, p. 2), as amended.

1

---