# C_2017195EN.01001101.xml

| 19.6.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 195/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 195/11

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia del País Vasco (Spain) lodged on 21 March 2017 — José Luis Cabana Carballo v Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social (INSS) and Tesorería General de la Seguridad Social (TGSS)

(Case C-141/17)

(2017/C 195/16)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunal Superior de Justicia del País Vasco

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: José Luis Cabana Carballo

Appellant:

Respondents: Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social (INSS), Tesorería General de la Seguridad Social (TGSS)

Respondents:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Must Article 53(3)(a) and (d) of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 (1) be regarded as one of the contrary provisions referred to by Article 5 thereof and therefore as applicable instead of the provisions of Article 5(b)? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must Article 53(3)(a) and (d) of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 (1) be regarded as one of the contrary provisions referred to by Article 5 thereof and therefore as applicable instead of the provisions of Article 5(b)?

1

| 2. | For the purposes of Article 53(3)(a) of that regulation, is the Spanish legislation concerning the 20 % supplement to the pension for total permanent incapacity to perform the normal occupation to be regarded as establishing that allowances and income acquired abroad are to be taken into account? |
| --- | --- |

2.

For the purposes of Article 53(3)(a) of that regulation, is the Spanish legislation concerning the 20 % supplement to the pension for total permanent incapacity to perform the normal occupation to be regarded as establishing that allowances and income acquired abroad are to be taken into account?

| 3. | If the reply to the previous question is in the negative, is the Spanish administrative and judicial practice of suspending the 20 % supplement to the pension for total permanent capacity to perform the normal occupation when the beneficiary receives a retirement pension from another Member State contrary to that Community provision? |
| --- | --- |

3.

If the reply to the previous question is in the negative, is the Spanish administrative and judicial practice of suspending the 20 % supplement to the pension for total permanent capacity to perform the normal occupation when the beneficiary receives a retirement pension from another Member State contrary to that Community provision?

| 4. | If the reply to question 2 is in the affirmative, is it to be regarded as incompatible with Article 53(3)(d) of the Regulation for the 20 % supplement to the pension for total permanent incapacity to perform the normal occupation also to be suspended in respect of that part which exceeds the amount of the pension from the other Member State? |
| --- | --- |

4.

If the reply to question 2 is in the affirmative, is it to be regarded as incompatible with Article 53(3)(d) of the Regulation for the 20 % supplement to the pension for total permanent incapacity to perform the normal occupation also to be suspended in respect of that part which exceeds the amount of the pension from the other Member State?

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems (Text with relevance for the EEA and for Switzerland), OJ 2004 L 166, p. 1.

1

---