Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2003:649
Date: 2003-12-02
Language of the case: German
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Social security for migrant workers
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Germany

Summary of the Judgment 1. Social security for migrant workers – Community rules – Matters covered – Benefits under a national social security scheme covering the risk of reliance on care – Payment of old age insurance contributions of the carer assisting the reliant person – Inclusion as a sickness benefit (Council Regulation No 1408/71, Art. 4(1)(a)) 2. Social security for migrant workers – Equal treatment – National care insurance scheme refusing a national of a Member State other than the competent State payment of old age insurance contributions – Scheme entailing discrimination against a citizen of the Union prohibited by Community law (Art. 17 EC; Council Regulation No 1408/71) 1. A benefit such as the payment, by the body providing care insurance, of old age insurance contributions of a third party providing care in the home of a person reliant on care constitutes a sickness benefit for the benefit of a person reliant on care covered by Regulation No 1408/71, as amended and updated by Regulation No 118/97. (see paras 20-21, 23, operative part 1) 2. Article 17 EC and Regulation No 1408/71, as amended and updated by Regulation No 118/97, preclude care insurance benefits comprising payment of old age insurance contributions of a national of a Member State in the position of the third party caring for the insured person being refused by the competent institution on the sole ground that that third party or person covered by that insurance resides in a Member State other than the competent State. In fact, the status of Union citizenship enables nationals of the Member States who find themselves in the same situation to enjoy within the scope of the Treaty the same treatment in law, subject to such exceptions as are expressly provided for. In that context, in view of the purpose of the activity carried on by third parties assisting persons reliant on care, the condition as to residency on which the refusal of that care insurance benefit is based appears to afford different treatment to comparable situations, rather than to constitute a factor objectively establishing a difference in their situations and thus justifying such different treatment, and therefore constitutes discrimination prohibited by Community law. (see paras 34-36, operative part 2)