Information;Order — ECLI:EU:C:2025:973
Date: 2025-12-11
Language of the case: Bulgarian
Court formation: Tenth Chamber
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling - inadmissible
Origin: Bulgaria

Translation C-375/25 – 1 
Case C-375/25 
Request for a preliminary ruling 
Date lodged: 
5 June 2025 
Referring court: 
Administrativen sad Varna (Bulgaria) 
Date of the decision to refer: 
30 May 2025 
Applicant: 
Yu.Sht. 
Defendant: 
Direktor na Direktsia ‘Sotsialno podpomagane’ Varna 
  
ORDER 
[…] 
Varna, 30 May 2025 
In its decision in administrative case no 2602/2024 of the Varna 
Administrative Court, after examination  […], 
the Administrativen sad – Varna (Administrative Court, Varna, Bulgaria), 
division III […] 
has taken the following into account: 
The procedure is governed by Article 145 et seq. of the 
Administrativnoprotsesualen kodeks (Code of administrative procedure) in 
conjunction with Article 10(6) of the Zakon za semeyni pomoshti za detsa (Law 
on family benefits for children, ‘the ZSPD’). 
EN 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 30. 5. 2025 – CASE C-375/25 
 
2  
I. Parties and the subject matter of the main proceedings 
The subject matter of the proceedings is an action brought by Yu.Sht. … [not 
translated] 1 against the order …[not translated] [of] 15 October 2024 2 of the 
Direktor na Direktsia ‘Sotsialno podpomagane’ (Director of the ‘social assistance’ 
directorate – Varna. 3 … [not translated] 
In the contested decision, the applicant’s application for benefits under 
Article 7(1)… [not translated] [ZSPD] for her children O. … [not translated] and 
D. …[not translated] was rejected. According to the grounds of the decision, the 
applicant is not entitled to the monthly benefits because her family members are 
Ukrainian nationals and there is no international treaty to which Bulgaria is a 
party and which provides for this type of benefit to be granted. 
In her complaint, the applicant argued that the decision was unlawful because it 
infringed the Konstitutsia (constitution) and Bulgaria’s international obligations, 
in particular Article 2 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the 
Child. She also argued that the decision was contrary to the purpose of the law 
since Ukrainian nationals enjoying international protection were entitled to those 
benefits, but not Ukrainian nationals whose right of residence was based on a 
different ground. 
According to Article 10(6) of the ZSPD, the decision of the administrative 
court in the present proceedings is final, that is to say there is no further 
judicial remedy against it within the meaning of the third paragraph of 
Article 267 TFEU. 
II. Facts 
The administrative files show that the applicant, her husband and two children are 
Ukrainian nationals who were residing permanently on the territory of the 
Republic of Bulgaria at the time the application was made. 
According to the information in their identity cards, the applicant and her family 
members obtained permanent resident status on the following dates: the applicant 
no later than on 15 October 2021, her husband on 17 January 2022, and her son 
and daughter on 13 June 2024 and 6 June 2024, respectively. It is unclear on what 
ground the persons concerned were granted a permanent right of residence. 
By letter dated 4 October 2024, the applicant submitted a formal application for 
the grant of monthly family  benefit pursuant to Article 7(1) … [not translated] 
 
1 ‘the applicant’. 
2  ‘the contested decision’. 
3  ‘the administrative authority’. 
SOTSIALNO PODPOMAGANE VARNA 
 
3 
[ZSPD], in which she stated that she lived in the country permanently and cared 
for her children … [not translated] in her own household, that from September 
2023 to September 2024 she was the managing director of a company registered 
in Bulgaria, from which she did not receive any income, and that her husband was 
not insured and received neither income from gainful employment nor from any 
other forms of financial benefits. The total gross income of the family for the 
period stated in the tax return was 0 leva (BGN). 
In the proceedings, it was not disputed that the other conditions for granting the 
monthly benefits, which were refused, were met, namely that the average monthly 
income per family member is below the established threshold, 4 the child lives in 
the joint household on the territory of the Republic of Bulgaria and has its 
permanent residence there, regularly attends the age-appropriate educational 
institution and has completed all prescribed paediatric check-ups, including 
vaccinations. 
III. Provisions of law relied on 
National legislation 
Konstitutsia na Republika Bulgaria (Constitution of the Republic of 
Bulgaria) 
Article 26(1) […] 
(2) Foreigners residing in the Republic of Bulgaria shall have all rights and 
obligations under this Constitution, with the exception of the rights and 
obligations for which the Constitution and the laws require Bulgarian nationality. 
Zakon za [semeyni] pomoshti za detsa (Law on [family] benefits for children) 
(in the version applicable at the time of the dispute, DV [Darzhaven vestnik, 
State Gazette] no 66 of 1 August 2023) 
Article 1 This law governs the conditions for entitlement to family benefits in the 
event of pregnancy, childbirth and child-rearing, as well as the forms and 
procedure for granting them. 
(2) Family benefits are benefits in cash and/or in kind that support parents or 
guardians in raising children in the family environment. 
Article 2 (1) Family benefits under this law are one-off payments and monthly 
benefits. 
 
4 This threshold is laid down in the Zakon za darzhavnia byudzhet (Law on the state budget) for 
the respective year. For 2024, the threshold for entitlement to the full benefit was BGN 710, for 
2025 it was also BGN 710 until 31 March and rose to BGN 760 from 1 April. 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 30. 5. 2025 – CASE C-375/25 
 
4  
[…] 
(3) The monthly family benefits are: 
1. […] 
2. monthly benefit until completion of secondary education, but at most until 
the age of 20; 
[…] 
Article 3 The following persons are entitled to family benefits: 
1. […]; 
2. (formerly no 1 – DV no 69 of 2004) families of Bulgarian nationals – for 
children cared for in Bulgaria; 
3. (formerly no 2 – DV no 69 of 2004) families in which one parent is a 
Bulgarian national – for children with Bulgarian nationality who are cared for in 
Bulgaria; 
4. […]; 
5. (formerly no 4, amended – DV no 69 of 2004) pregnant women – foreign 
nationals, and families of foreign nationals with a permanent right of 
residence and who care for their children in Bulgaria, if the receipt of such 
benefits is provided for in another law or in an international treaty to which 
the Republic of Bulgaria is bound as a contracting state. 
Article 4а (1) Families whose average monthly income per family member in the 
previous 12 months is less than or equal to the amount specified in the Law on the 
state budget of the Republic of Bulgaria for the year in question, but not less than 
in the previous year, shall be entitled to family allowances under Article 2(3)(2). 
Article 7(1) Monthly family benefits for a child up to the completion of secondary 
education, but at most until the age of 20, shall be granted to families who meet 
the requirements of Article 4a and who are permanently resident in Bulgaria, 
provided that the child: 
1. is not in care outside of the family household […]; 
2. regularly attends pre-school groups […] for the compulsory pre-school 
education of children, unless this is not possible due to their state of health; 
3. regularly attends school until completion of secondary education, but at 
most until the age of 20, unless this is not possible due to their state of health; 
SOTSIALNO PODPOMAGANE VARNA 
 
5 
4. has completed all age- and health-related vaccinations and preventive 
medical check-ups; 
5. is permanently resident in Bulgaria. 
International legal acts 
Convention between the Republic of Bulgaria and Ukraine on social security, 
ratified by a law passed by the Narodno sabranie (Bulgarian National Assembly) 
of 28 November 2001, which is in effect since 1 April 2003. 
Article 2 
(1) This convention covers the following areas of social security: 
1. in the Republic of Bulgaria: 
- financial benefits in the event of temporary incapacity for work and 
maternity; 
- old-age pension; 
- pension for reduced earning capacity due to general illness; 
- pensions for reduced earning capacity due to an accident at work and 
occupational illness; 
- survivors’ pensions; 
- unemployment benefits; 
- funeral grant. 
Article 4 
Each contracting party shall, on its territory, grant the nationals of the other 
contracting party the same rights as its own nationals in the field of social security 
in accordance with Article 2 of this convention. 
Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted by the General Assembly of the 
United Nations on 20 November 1989, ratified by resolution of the Veliko 
Narodno sabranie (Grand National Assembly) of 11 April 1991, in effect since 
3 July 1991. 
Article 2 
(1) States Parties shall respect and ensure the rights set forth in the present 
Convention to each child within their jurisdiction without discrimination of any 
kind, irrespective of the child’s or his or her parent’s or legal guardian’s race, 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 30. 5. 2025 – CASE C-375/25 
 
6  
colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social 
origin, property, disability, birth or other status. 
[…] 
Article 27 
(1) States Parties recognise the right of every child to a standard of living adequate 
for the child’s physical, mental, spiritual, moral and social development. 
(2) The parent(s) or others responsible for the child have the primary 
responsibility to secure, within their abilities and financial capacities, the 
conditions of living necessary for the child’s development. 
(3) States Parties, in accordance with national conditions and within their means, 
shall take appropriate measures to assist parents and others responsible for the 
child to implement this right and shall in case of need provide material assistance 
and support programmes, particularly with regard to nutrition, clothing and 
housing. 
European Union law 
Council Directive 2003/109/EC of 25 November 2003 concerning the status of 
third-country nationals who are long-term residents, in particular Article 44 (OJ L 
16, 2004, p. 44) 
Recital 13 
With regard to social assistance, the possibility of limiting the benefits for long-
term residents to core benefits is to be understood in the sense that this notion 
covers at least minimum income support, assistance in case of illness, pregnancy, 
parental assistance and long-term care. The modalities for granting such benefits 
should be determined by national law. 
Article 11 
(1) Long-term residents shall enjoy equal treatment with nationals as regards: 
[…] 
(d) social security, social assistance and social protection as defined by national 
law; 
[…] 
(4) Member States may limit equal treatment in respect of social assistance and 
social protection to core benefits. 
SOTSIALNO PODPOMAGANE VARNA 
 
7 
IV. Reasoning in the request for a preliminary ruling 
The contested decision rejected benefits under Article 7(1) in conjunction with 
Article 2(3)(2) of the ZSPD. 
In accordance with Article 3 of the ZSPD, the entitlement to family benefits for 
children under the ZSPD is directly linked to the Bulgarian nationality of at least 
one parent and the child, if one of the parents is not a Bulgarian national. 
According to Article 3(5) of the ZSPD, families of foreign nationals residing 
permanently in Bulgaria are only entitled to receive these benefits if that is 
provided for in another law or in an international treaty to which Bulgaria is 
bound as a contracting state. In the present case, there is no other national 
provision under which the applicant would be entitled to such family benefit. 5 
The family benefits are not covered by the Convention on social security between 
Bulgaria and Ukraine. The parents’ right of permanent residence was acquired 
before the start of the war in Ukraine and there is no evidence that they applied for 
international protection. 
In their case-law on the application of Article 7(1) of the ZSPD to permanent 
residents, some Bulgarian courts refer directly to Article 2 and 27 of the 
Convention on the Rights of the Child and to the International Covenant on 
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in order to overcome the explicit provision 
in Article 3(5) of the ZSPD and overturn the decisions refusing to grant family 
benefits on grounds of equal treatment. The referring court division does not agree 
with that case-law since it believes that the difference in treatment between 
foreign nationals who are permanent residents in Bulgaria and Bulgarian nationals 
is justified by their different legal status and is, in principle, permissible under 
Article 26(2) of the constitution. The same applies to the different treatment of 
nationals of one and the same state who reside in the Republic of Bulgaria based 
on different grounds – on the basis of international protection status or on the 
basis of a right of permanent residence. The wording of Article 27(3) of the 
Convention on the Rights of the Child and of the International Covenant on 
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights does not impose a direct obligation on the 
state to grant every type of family benefit to every child on its territory, which 
would oblige the Court to refrain from applying Article 3(5) of the ZSPD. 
The referring court division assumes that the facts of the present case fall within 
the scope of Council Directive 2003/109/EC of 25 November 2003 concerning the 
status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents, 6 since the applicant 
and her family members are third-country nationals as defined in Article 2(a) of 
that directive who are lawfully staying in the Republic of Bulgaria on a long-term 
 
5 An example of a right to benefits provided for in another law can be found in Article 29(1)(4) of 
the Zakon za ubezhishteto i bezhantsite (Law on asylum and refugees), which provides for 
social assistance for foreigners who apply for international protection for the duration of the 
application procedure in the form and amount applicable to Bulgarian nationals. 
6  ‘Directive 2003/109’ or ‘the directive’. 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 30. 5. 2025 – CASE C-375/25 
 
8  
basis. Article 11 (‘equal treatment’) is relevant given that Article 3(5) of the ZSPD 
essentially restricts the rights of long-term residents as defined in Directive 
2003/109. 
In response to the request to comment on a possible reference for a preliminary 
ruling on the compatibility of the Bulgarian legislation with the directive, the 
applicant’s legal representative raised objections and took the view that the 
Convention on the Rights of the Child, in particular the prohibition of 
discrimination under Article 2(2), Article 21(2) of the Charter of Fundamental 
Rights of the European Union and Part V Article E of the European Social Charter 
are directly applicable. Directive 2003/109 has not been transposed into national 
law and any natural person can invoke it by applying to the authority concerned 
for its application. In the opinion of the legal representative, all foreigners 
permanently resident in Bulgaria have a clear and unambiguous right to social 
assistance on the basis of Article 11 of the directive. The administrative authority 
did not comment on the request. 
According to the referring court division, Bulgaria is obliged to ensure equal 
treatment of the applicant at least to the extent provided for in Article 11(4) of the 
directive. In order to assess the legality of the contested decision, it is essential to 
clarify whether the requested benefit, as provided for in national law, fulfils the 
criterion of a ‘core benefit’ within the meaning of the aforementioned provision. 
The answer to that question cannot be inferred from the existing case-law of the 
Court of Justice of the European Union on the application of the directive since, to 
date, the court has not examined a benefit such as the one at issue here. 
The fact that third-country nationals who have become resident in a Member State 
and their right to equal treatment in the sectors referred to in Article 11(1)(d) of 
Directive 2003/109 is the general rule, the derogation provided for in Article 11(4) 
thereof must be interpreted strictly (judgment of 24 April 2012, Kamberaj, 
C-571/10, EU:C:2012:233, paragraph 86). 
The concept of ‘core benefit’ within the meaning of Article 11(4) of Directive 
2003/109 was interpreted in the judgments of 24 April 2012, Kamberaj, C-571/10, 
EU:C:2012:233, and of 10 June 2021, Land Oberösterreich v KV, C-94/20, 
EU:C:2021:477, albeit in the context of housing benefit and housing assistance. In 
those judgments, the Court of Justice held that equal treatment may be restricted, 
with the exception of benefits which enable individuals to meet their basic needs 
such as food, accommodation and health (paragraph 90 and 91 of the judgment in 
Case C-571/10 and paragraph 38 of the judgment in Case C-94/20). 
As is apparent from paragraphs 43 and 44 of the judgment of 10 June 2021 in 
Case C-94/20, it is for the referring court to ascertain whether the benefit at issue 
constitutes a ‘core benefit’, the conditions subject to which it is awarded and the 
place of that benefit in the national system of social assistance in order to assess 
the conditions for granting and the status of the specific assistance in the national 
social assistance system, since, even if the national system includes other social 
SOTSIALNO PODPOMAGANE VARNA 
 
9 
assistance in order to ensure a decent existence, that cannot preclude a specific 
benefit from being regarded as such if it also meets the criteria referred to in 
paragraphs 38 to 40 of the present judgment. The criteria developed by the Court 
of Justice in those paragraphs for categorising benefits as core benefits are that 
they must contribute to meeting the basic needs of the individuals concerned in 
terms of food, accommodation and health in order to ensure a decent existence for 
all those who do not have sufficient resources. At the same time, the Court of 
Justice recommended that the national court take into account the context of 
Article 11(4) of that directive and the objective pursued by the directive, namely, 
as is apparent in particular from recitals 2, 4 and 12 thereof, the integration of 
third-country nationals who have resided legally and continuously in the Member 
States. 
Recital 13 of the directive, in the light of which Article 11(4) must be interpreted, 
defines core benefits as minimum income support, assistance in case of illness, 
pregnancy, parental assistance (aide parentale) and long-term care. The wording 
of the second recital of the directive, in particular the use of the undefined term 
‘parental assistance’, raises the question of whether all social assistance that can 
be described as ‘parental assistance’ constitute core benefits or whether they must 
additionally fulfil the criterion of being a ‘core benefit’. The case-law of the Court 
of Justice regarding Directive 2011/95/EU, 7 recital 45 of which uses the same 
term ‘parental assistance’ (in the Bulgarian version literally ‘family support 
services for children’) in the context of restricting social assistance for 
beneficiaries with international protection to core benefits, does not provide an 
interpretation that allows for a delimitation of the term aide parentale. 
If the national court has to assess whether a specific benefit is intended to satisfy 
basic needs and thus constitutes a ‘core benefit’, as suggested in paragraph 44 of 
the judgment of 10 June 2021 in Case C-94/20, the question arises as to which 
criteria to apply when making such assessment. 
According to the referring court division, the benefit in question can be 
categorised as ‘parental assistance’, provided that it is granted to the parents. 
However, its categorisation as a ‘core benefit’ is controversial, as it is not aimed at 
satisfying basic needs such as food, accommodation and health, but also for the 
following reasons. 
The purpose of family support services under the ZSPD, as defined in its 
Article 1(2), is to support parents or guardians raising school-age children in a 
family environment. That provision was amended by the Law amending and 
supplementing the ZSPD (DV no 57 of 28 July 2015). The explanatory 
memorandum of the Ministerski savet (Council of Ministers) to the draft law with 
 
7 Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on 
standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of 
international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary 
protection, and for the content of the protection granted (OJ 2011 L 337, p. 9). 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 30. 5. 2025 – CASE C-375/25 
 
10  
reference number 502-01-35 8 states that: ‘the amendments and additions relate 
mainly to the promotion of responsible parenthood, the introduction of a higher 
level of support up to the third child and greater social justice in the provision of 
family support services.’ In view of those objectives, the following requirements 
were introduced (in addition to low income): that the family and the child must 
reside permanently in Bulgaria, that the child has not been placed in care outside 
of the family, that the child attends the appropriate educational institution and 
undergoes regular health checks. The same objectives are also pursued by the 
measures provided for in the same draft law to suspend family benefits in the 
event of neglect of childcare, irregular school attendance or dropping out of 
school. In other words, these family benefits are intended to promote parental 
responsibility by encouraging parents to raise their children in a family 
environment and to ensure that their children benefit from the education and 
health services provided by the state. 
In view of the amount of the refused benefits, they were not intended to cover 
either child maintenance costs or those of the family as a whole. The statutory 
amount of the benefit applied for, for a family with two children, was set at 
BGN 110 per month for both 2024 and 2025. That amount is not sufficient to 
cover the basic needs of a family of four given that the poverty threshold set by 
the government, to which social assistance and financial support under the ZSP 
[Zakon za sotsialnoto podpomagane, Law on social assistance], ZHU [Zakon za 
horata s uvrezhdania, Law on persons with disabilities] and ZZD [Zakon za 
zakrila na deteto, Law on child protection] are linked, averaged BGN 526 per 
person in a household in 2024 and BGN 638 in 2025. According to data from the 
Nationalen statisticheski institut (National Statistical Institute), the average 
monthly household consumption expenditure for 2024 amounted to BGN 1 562. 
The Bulgarian social assistance system provides for benefits to cover basic needs 
enshrined in other laws – the Law on social assistance (ZSP) and the Law on child 
protection (ZZD). 9 The ZSPD provides for the grant of social assistance in the 
form of cash and/or in-kind benefits to supplement or replace an individual’s own 
income until basic needs are met or to meet unforeseen needs of the supported 
persons and families, 10 while the ZZD provides for monthly and one-off financial 
assistance to support the child and the family, in particular to prevent neglect, 
foster reintegration into the family environment and for other purposes. 
Foreigners who have the status of permanent residents in Bulgaria are entitled to 
all those types of benefits under the ZSP in accordance with Article 2(6) of the 
ZSP under the same conditions that are applicable to Bulgarian nationals. The 
ZZD and its implementing regulation, which governs financial support, apply to 
 
8 Available at https://parliament.bg/bg/bills/ID/15370 
9 There are also benefits to meet the basic needs of persons with disabilities under the Law on 
persons with disabilities, but the present case does not invoke such circumstances. 
10 Article 11(1) of the ZSP. 
SOTSIALNO PODPOMAGANE VARNA 
 
11 
all children for whom the Bulgarian authorities are responsible, without 
distinction as to their nationality. However, it should be noted that other 
conditions apply to the receipt of benefits under the ZSP and ZZD (those include 
but are not limited to registration as a jobseeker and performance of community 
service) and other circumstances are also taken into account when granting 
benefits (for example, financial circumstances and pursuit of a commercial 
activity). During the period in question, the applicant’s family did not receive any 
other support to cover basic needs, even though, according to the information 
contained in the declaration submitted during the administrative procedure, it was 
not in receipt of any income in Bulgaria. While the reason for that does not fall 
within the scope of judicial review in the present case, it may help to clarify issues 
related to integration as a process which also involves persons with a right of 
permanent residence. 
For those reasons, the referring court division is of the opinion that, for purposes 
of the decision in the main proceedings, it is necessary to determine whether 
Article 3(5) of the ZSPD is compatible with the directive and with the principle of 
equal treatment laid down therein and to clarify the criteria for assessing whether 
the family benefit at issue constitutes a ‘core benefit’ within the meaning of 
Article 11(4) of the directive, which means that it is necessary to refer the matter 
to the Court of Justice of the European Union for a preliminary ruling under the 
second sentence of part (b) of Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the 
European Union. 
In view of the above and on the basis of Article 628 and Article 631(1) of the 
Code of Civil Procedure in conjunction with Article 144 of the Code of 
Administrative Procedure, division III of the Varna Administrative Court made 
the following 
ORDER: 
The following questions are referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union 
for a preliminary ruling: 
1. Does the principle of equal treatment provided for in Article 11 of Directive 
2003/109 allow a national provision, such as Article 3(5) of the ZSPD 
(Bulgarian Law on family benefits for children), which restricts the 
entitlement to a family  benefit for children within the meaning of 
Article 7(1) of that law to third-country nationals entitled to permanent 
residency in the Republic of Bulgaria if the receipt of that benefit is not 
provided for in another law or in an international treaty to which the 
Republic of Bulgaria is bound as a contracting State? 
2. Must Article 11(4) in conjunction with recital 13 of Directive 2003/109 be 
interpreted as meaning that every family benefit constitutes a core benefit 
within the meaning of those provisions, or is it for the national court to 
assess whether a specific benefit constitutes a core benefit? If the latter is 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 30. 5. 2025 – CASE C-375/25 
 
12  
found to be the case, what criteria should be used to make that assessment 
and what circumstances should be taken into account? 
3. Is it relevant to the classification of a family benefit, such as the one at issue 
in the main proceedings, as a core benefit that the applicants have the right, 
under the same conditions as Bulgarian nationals, to other social assistance 
intended to meet basic needs, but have not exercised that right or do not 
meet the conditions for it? 
The proceedings … [not translated] will be stayed pending the decision of the 
Court of Justice of the European Union. 
… [not translated]