Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2014:2161
Date: 2014-09-04
Language of the case: Romanian
Subject matter: Social security for migrant workers
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Romania

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber), 22 January 2015 1. Acts of the institutions — Temporal application — Immediate application of the new rule to the future effects of a situation which arose under the old rule (Council Regulation No 1408/71, Art. 94(2)) 2. Social security — Migrant workers — EU legislation — Replacement of social security conventions concluded between Member States — Mandatory in nature — Bilateral agreement which relates to the social security benefits of nationals of one of the signatory States who had the status of political refugee in the territory of the other signatory State — Agreement not mentioned in Annex III to Regulation No 1408/71 — Move before the agreement was concluded — Agreement inapplicable (Council Regulation No 1408/71, Arts 6 and 7(2)(c) and Annex III) 3. Questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Interpretation — Temporal effects of judgments ruling on interpretation — Retroactive effect — Limitation by the Court — Conditions (Art. 267 TFEU) 1. See the text of the decision. (see paras 30, 31) 2. Article 7(2)(c) of Regulation No 1408/71, in the version amended and updated by Regulation No 118/97, as amended by Regulation No 1992/2006, must be interpreted as meaning that a bilateral agreement which relates to the social security benefits of nationals of one of the signatory States who had the status of political refugee in the territory of the other signatory State, which was concluded on a date when one of the two signatory States had not yet acceded to the European Union and which is not listed in Annex III to that regulation does not continue to apply to the situation of political refugees who were repatriated to their State of origin before the bilateral agreement was concluded and the regulation entered into force. The principles established in the judgment of 7 February 1991 in Rönfeldt are derived from the notion that the person concerned was entitled to entertain a legitimate expectation that he would be able to benefit from the provisions of a bilateral convention which alone was applicable to him on the date when he decided to move to another Member State. Accordingly, in circumstances an essential feature of which is that the persons concerned left a Member State for their State of origin six years before the bilateral agreement was concluded, those persons could not entertain a legitimate expectation that they would be able to benefit from the provisions of the bilateral agreement as it had not yet been concluded on the date of their repatriation to their State of origin. (see paras 41, 42, 45, operative part) 3. See the text of the decision. (see paras 50, 51)