Article 45 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which makes the grant of debt relief subject to a condition of residence in the Member State concerned.

Such national legislation amounts to a restriction on the freedom of movement for workers because it is capable of dissuading an insolvent worker, whose indebtedness is such that that he cannot be presumed to have the means to pay his or her debts within a foreseeable period, from exercising his right to freedom of movement. He will be dissuaded from leaving his Member State of origin to go and work in another Member State if by doing so he is denied the possibility of obtaining debt relief in that Member State of origin.

That restriction cannot be justified. First, it goes beyond what is necessary to attain the objective of the rules in question, to protect the debtor from foreign creditors who are not party to the debt relief procedure. In that regard, on the one hand, the condition of residence cannot exclude the risk that the creditors of a debtor residing in the Member State concerned will require the amounts owed to them to be paid in another Member State where such a debt relief measure is not recognised. On the other hand, it cannot exclude that a debtor who resides in another Member State may, pursuant to Article 5(1)(a) of Regulation No 44/2001, be sued by his creditors before the courts of the Member State whose legislation provides for that condition, those courts being able to claim jurisdiction particularly where the contractual obligation was performed or is to be performed in that Member State.

In contrast to a debtor resident in the Member State concerned, a debtor who does not reside there is denied the possibility of obtaining the protection offered to him in that Member State by a debt relief measure such as that at issue in the context of legal proceedings brought against him, by his creditors, in that Member State.

Second, that legislation goes beyond what is necessary to attain the objective of establishing, satisfactorily, the financial and personal situation of the debtor, in so far as the laying down of a residence condition such as that provided for by that legislation, based solely on the date on which the application for the grant of debt relief is submitted, is not a condition linked to the effectiveness of the checks by the competent authority of the Member State concerned. Moreover, with regard to a debtor who is the object of an earnings attachment order administered by that competent authority, who is ‘subject to unlimited income tax liability’ in the Member State concerned and whose employer is a national of that Member State, his financial and personal situation may be established without its being necessary for him to reside in that Member State. Equally, the competent authority of the Member State concerned may call upon such a debtor to travel to that Member State or, if such a visit cannot be undertaken, to provide it with all relevant information concerning his personal and financial situation, on pain of suspension or cancellation of the debt relief procedure concerned in the event of an unjustified refusal on the part that debtor.

(see paras 31, 32, 34, 40-44, 47-50, 54, operative part)