Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2016:743
Date: 2016-10-05
Language of the case: English
Subject matter: Social security for migrant workers
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: United Kingdom

Summary — Judgment of the Court (First Chamber), 1 February 2017 1. Social security — Migrant workers — EU rules — Scope ratione personae — Employed or self-employed person within the meaning of Regulation No 1408/71 — Concept — Person insured against the risk of old age under a social security scheme applying to all residents and identifying that person as an employed person — Included — Death of that person before reaching the retirement age — Irrelevant (Council Regulation No 1408/71, Art. 1(a)) 2. Social security — Migrant workers — EU rules — Matters covered — Care component of disability living allowance — Included as a sickness benefit and not as an invalidity benefit (Council Regulation No 1408/71, Art. 4(1)(a)) 3. Social security — Migrant workers — Legislation applicable — Person acquiring rights to an old-age pension by virtue of the contributions paid during a given period to the social security scheme of a Member State — Legislation of that Member State subsequently ceasing to be applicable to that person — Lawfulness (Council Regulations No 1408/71, Art. 13(2)(f) and Annex VI, and No 574/72, Art. 10b) 4. Social security — Migrant workers — Sickness insurance — Legislation of the competent State making entitlement to the care component of disability living allowance subject to a condition as to residence and presence on the territory of that Member State — Unlawful — Continuance, after the transfer of residence to another Member State, of the provision of benefits granted by the competent State — Condition — Authorisation to transfer residence to another Member State obtained from the competent institution (Council Regulation No 1408/71, Arts 22(1)(b) and 22(2)) 1. See the text of the decision. (see paras 38, 40-42) 2. A benefit such as the care component of disability living allowance is a sickness benefit for the purposes of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community, in the version amended and updated by Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of 2 December 1996, as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 307/1999 of 8 February 1999. The fact that, for the purposes of grant of the care component of disability living allowance, the reduction in mobility must relate to a substantial period of time is not such as to change the purpose of that allowance, which is to improve the quality of life of persons reliant on care (see, by analogy, judgment of 18 October 2007, Commission v Parliament and Council, C‑299/05, EU:C:2007:608, paragraph 63). Furthermore, the Court has held that benefits, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, relating to the risk of reliance on care must be treated as sickness benefits, within the meaning of Article 4(1)(a) of Regulation No 1408/71, although, unlike sickness benefits stricto sensu, they are not in principle intended to be paid on a short-term basis and they may, particularly as regards the details of their application, display characteristics which in practice also resemble to a certain extent the invalidity and old-age branches (see, to that effect, judgment of 30 June 2011, da Silva Martins, C‑388/09, EU:C:2011:439, paragraphs 47 and 48). (see paras 53-55, operative part 1) 3. Article 13(2)(f) of Regulation No 1408/71, in the version amended and updated by Regulation No 118/97, as amended by Regulation No 307/1999, must be interpreted as meaning that the fact that a person has acquired rights to an old-age pension by virtue of the contributions paid during a given period to the social security scheme of a Member State does not preclude the legislation of that Member State from subsequently ceasing to be applicable to that person. It is for the national court to determine, in the light of the circumstances of the case before it and of the provisions of the applicable national law, when that legislation ceased to be applicable to that person. As is stated in Article 10b of Council Regulation (EEC) No 574/72 of 21 March 1972 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation No 1408/71 (OJ, English Special Edition 1972 (I), p. 160), as amended by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2195/91 of 25 June 1991 (OJ 1991 L 206, p. 2), the date and conditions on which the legislation of a Member State ceases to be applicable to a person referred to in Article 13(2)(f) of Regulation No 1408/71 are to be determined in accordance with that legislation. Furthermore, in determining when the legislation of a Member State ceases to be applicable to a person, account is also to be taken, where appropriate, of Annex VI to Regulation No 1408/71, which sets out special procedures for applying the legislation of certain Member States. (see paras 65, 66, 69, operative part 2) 4. Article 22(1)(b) of Regulation No 1408/71, in the version amended and updated by Regulation No 118/97, as amended by Regulation No 307/1999, must be interpreted as preventing legislation of the competent State from making entitlement to an allowance such as that at issue in the main proceedings subject to a condition as to residence and presence on the territory of that Member State. Article 22(1)(b) and Article 22(2) of Regulation No 1408/71, in the version amended and updated by Regulation No 118/97, as amended by Regulation No 307/1999, must be interpreted as meaning that a person in a situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings retains the right to receive the benefits referred to in Article 22(1)(b) after transferring his residence to a Member State other than the competent State, provided that he has obtained authorisation for that purpose. (see paras 93, operative part 3)