Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:1999:284
Date: 1999-06-08
Language of the case: Dutch
Court formation: Fifth Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Right of establishment;Free movement of workers
Concepts: General;Equal treatment
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Netherlands

Summary of the Judgment 
1. Freedom of movement for persons — Workers — Concept — Existence of an 
employment relationship — Pursuit of activities which are effective and genuine — 
Spouse of the director and sole shareholder of a company — Covered 
(EC Treaty, Art. 48 (now, after amendment, Art. 39 EC); Council Regulation 
No 1612/68) 
I - 3289 
SUMMARY — CASE C-337/97 
2. Freedom of movement for persons — Workers — Equal treatment — Social advan­
tages — Study finance — Grant to dependent descendants of a worker who is a 
national of another Member State — Residence requirement — Not permissible 
(Council Regulation No 1612/68, Art. 7) 
3. Freedom of movement for persons — Freedom of establishment — Legislation of a 
Member State making study finance in the case of children of nationals of other 
Member States conditional upon residence in the national territory — Discrimination 
against dependent descendants of self-employed workers — Not permissible 
(EC Treaty, Art. 52 (now, after amendment, Art. 43 EC)) 
1. The concept of 'worker', within the 
meaning of Article 48 of the Treaty 
(now, after amendment, Article 39 EC) 
and of Regulation No 1612/68, has a 
specific Community meaning and must 
not be interpreted narrowly. Any per­
son who pursues activities which are 
effective and genuine, to the exclusion 
of activities on such a small scale as to 
be regarded as purely marginal and 
ancillary, must be regarded as a 
'worker'. The essential feature of an 
employment relationship is that for a 
certain period of time a person per­
forms services for and under the direc­
tion of another person in return for 
which he receives remuneration. 
The fact that a person is related by 
marriage to the director and sole share­
holder of a company does not preclude 
that person from being classified as a 
'worker' within the meaning of the 
above provisions, so long as he pursues 
his activity in the context of a relation­
ship of subordination. The personal 
and property relations between spouses 
which result from marriage do not rule 
out the existence, in the context of the 
organisation of an undertaking, of a 
relationship of subordination charac­
teristic of an employment relationship. 
2. While a Member State may not make 
the grant of a social advantage within 
the meaning of Article 7 of Regulation 
No 1612/68 dependent on the condi­
tion that the beneficiaries be resident 
within its territory, the principle of 
equal treatment laid down in that 
provision is also intended to prevent 
discrimination to the detriment of 
descendants dependent on the worker. 
In a situation where national legisla­
tion does not impose any residence 
requirement on the children of national 
workers for the financing of their 
studies, such a requirement is discrimi­
natory if imposed on the children of 
workers who are nationals of other 
Member States. 
Accordingly, the dependent child of a 
national of a Member State who pur­
sues an activity as an employed person 
in another Member State while main­
taining his residence in the State of 
which he is a national can rely on 
Article 7(2) of Regulation No 1612/68 
in order to obtain study finance under 
the same conditions as are applicable 
to children of nationals of the State of 
employment, and in particular without 
any further requirement as to the 
child's place of residence. 
I - 3290 
MEEUSEN V HOOFDDIRECTIE VAN DE INFORMATIE BEHEER GROEP 
3. Article 52 of the Treaty (now, after 
amendment, Article 43 EC) confers on 
nationals of a Member State who wish 
to pursue activities as self-employed 
persons in another Member State the 
benefit of the same treatment as the 
host State's own nationals and prohi­
bits any discrimination based on 
nationality which hinders the taking 
up or pursuit of such activities. The 
principle of equal treatment is also 
intended to prevent discrimination to 
the detriment of descendants who are 
dependent on a self-employed worker. 
It precludes, therefore, national legisla­
tion which makes study finance condi­
tional upon a residence requirement in 
the case of the children of workers who 
are nationals of other Member States 
but not in the case of the children of 
workers who are nationals of the host 
State, since such a condition is discri­
minatory. 
Accordingly, the dependent child of a 
national of a Member State who pur­
sues an activity as a self-employed 
person in another Member State while 
maintaining his residence in the State 
of which he is a national can obtain 
study finance under the same condi­
tions as are applicable to children of 
nationals of the State of establishment, 
and in particular without any further 
requirement as to the child's place of 
residence. 
I - 3291