Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2000:411
Date: 2000-07-13
Language of the case: French
Court formation: Fifth Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Social security for migrant workers;Social Policy
Concepts: Equality for men and women
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Belgium

Summary of the Judgment 
Social policy — Men and women — Equal pay •— Belgian additional pre-retirement 
payment — Classification as an occupational social security scheme within the meaning of 
Council Directive 86/378 — Applicability of Protocol No 2 concerning Article 119 of the 
Treaty (Articles 117 to 120 of the Treaty have been replaced by Article 136 EC to 143 
EC) annexed to the EC Treaty — Directive 76/207 not applicable 
(EC Treaty; Protocol No 2 concerning Art. 119 (Articles 117 to 120 of the EC Treaty 
have been replaced by Arts 136 EC to 143 EC); Council Directives 76/207, Art. 5, and 
86/378, Arts 2 and 4) 
I-6155 
SUMMARY — CASE C-166/99 
An occupational scheme such as the Bel­
gian scheme for additional pre-retirement 
payment provided for by Collective Agree­
ment No 17, rendered compulsory by the 
Royal Decree of 16 January 1975 and 
provided for in the Collective Labour 
Agreement of 23 May 1984 concluded 
within Joint Sub-Committee No 315.1, 
which provides protection against the risk 
of unemployment by providing workers 
employed by an undertaking with benefits 
intended to supplement the unemployment 
benefit provided under a statutory social 
security scheme, must be classified as an 
occupational social security scheme within 
the meaning of Articles 2 and 4 of Directive 
86/378, as amended by Council Directive 
96/97. The additional payment at issue thus 
constitutes a benefit under an occupational 
social security scheme within the meaning 
of Protocol No 2 concerning Article 119 of 
the Treaty (Articles 117 to 120 of the 
Treaty have been replaced by Articles 136 
EC to 143 EC), annexed to the EC Treaty, 
so that it may therefore apply if the 
conditions it lays down are fulfilled. 
An additional payment which, as in the 
present case, constitutes 'pay' within the 
meaning of Article 119 of the Treaty is not 
covered by Article 5 of Directive 76/207 on 
the implementation of the principle of 
equal treatment for men and women as 
regards access to employment, vocational 
training and promotion, and working con­
ditions. 
(see paras 29-30, 33, 36, 
operative part 1-2) 
I -6156