Judgment of the Court of 10 December 1969. - Caisse d'assurance vieillesse des travailleurs salariés de Paris v Jeanne Duffy. - Reference for a preliminary ruling: Cour d'appel de Paris - France. - Case 34-69.



European Court reports 1969 Page 00597

Danish special edition Page 00169

Greek special edition Page 00229

Portuguese special edition Page 00241

Spanish special edition Page 00469



Summary

Parties

Subject of the case

Grounds

Decision on costs

Operative part



Keywords

++++

SOCIAL SECURITY FOR MIGRANT WORKERS - RULES OF COMMUNITY LAW - LIMITATION OF BENEFITS ARISING FROM THE APPLICATION OF COMMUNITY REGULATIONS - MAINTENANCE OF ADVANTAGES OBTAINED OUTSIDE COMMUNITY REGULATIONS .

( EEC TREATY, ARTICLES 48 TO 51 )

Summary

IT IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE OBJECTIVES OF ARTICLES 48 TO 51 OF THE EEC TREATY WHICH CONSTITUTE THE BASIS, THE FRAMEWORK AND THE BOUNDS OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY REGULATIONS TO REDUCE THE RIGHTS OF WORKERS WITHOUT CONFERRING UPON THEM THE COMPENSATING BENEFITS PRESCRIBED IN THOSE REGULATIONS .

LIMITATIONS MAY THEREFORE BE IMPOSED ON WORKERS ONLY IN CASES IN WHICH COMMUNITY REGULATIONS CONFER UPON THEM BENEFITS WHICH THEY WOULD OTHERWISE BE UNABLE TO OBTAIN .

Parties

IN CASE 34/69

REFERENCE TO THE COURT UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY BY THE COUR D' APPEL, PARIS, ( SOCIAL CHAMBER ), FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING IN THE ACTION PENDING BEFORE THAT COURT BETWEEN

CAISSE D' ASSURANCE VIEILLESSE DES TRAVAILLEURS SALARIES, PARIS,

AND

JEANNE DUFFY, RESIDING AT 17 RUE FOURCROY, PARIS,

Subject of the case

ON THE INTERPRETATION OF REGULATION NO 3 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES CONCERNING SOCIAL SECURITY FOR MIGRANT WORKERS, ESPECIALLY ARTICLE 11(2 ),

Grounds

1 BY A JUDGMENT OF 27 JUNE 1969 WHICH WAS RECEIVED AT THE COURT REGISTRY ON 30 JULY 1969, THE COUR D' APPEL, PARIS, HAS REFERRED TO THE COURT OF JUSTICE UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EEC, THE QUESTION : " CAN REGULATION NO 3, CONCERNING SOCIAL SECURITY FOR MIGRANT WORKERS, ESPECIALLY ARTICLE 11(2 ) DEALING WITH PROVISIONS FOR THE REDUCTION OR SUSPENSION OF BENEFIT, APPLY AS AGAINST A WIDOW WHO IS IN RECEIPT OF AN OLD-AGE PENSION OBTAINED BY VIRTUE OF HER HAVING WORKED AS A WAGE-EARNER IN ONE MEMBER STATE AND WHO CLAIMS IN A SECOND MEMBER STATE WHERE SHE HAS HER PERMANENT RESIDENCE THE SURVIVOR'S PENSION ACQUIRED BY HER HUSBAND IN THE SECOND MEMBER STATE ".

THE REQUEST FOR INTERPRETATION MAY BE REDUCED TO THE QUESTION IN WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES THE PROVISIONS FOR REDUCTION OR SUSPENSION LAID DOWN BY THE LEGISLATION OF ONE MEMBER STATE ARE APPLICABLE, BY VIRTUE OF ARTICLE 11(2 ) OF REGULATION NO 3, AS AGAINST AN INSURED PERSON WHEN THERE IS PLURALITY OF ONE BENEFIT WITH OTHER SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS ACQUIRED UNDER A SCHEME IN ANOTHER MEMBER STATE .

3 UNDER ARTICLE 4(1 ) OF THE SAID REGULATION IT IS APPLICABLE " TO WAGE-EARNERS OR ASSIMILATED WORKERS WHO ARE OR HAVE BEEN SUBJECT TO THE LEGISLATION OF ONE OR MORE MEMBER STATES ..., AS ALSO TO THE MEMBERS OF THEIR FAMILIES AND THEIR SURVIVORS ".

4 FROM A COMPARISON OF THAT ARTICLE WITH ARTICLE 11(2 ) IT APPEARS THAT THE LATTER MAY APPLY TO WORKERS WHO HAVE BEEN SUBJECT TO THE LEGISLATION OF A SINGLE MEMBER STATE .

5 UNDER ARTICLE 11(2 ) PROVISIONS IN THE LEGISLATION OF ONE MEMBER STATE FOR THE REDUCTION OR SUSPENSION OF BENEFIT WHERE THERE IS PLURALITY WITH OTHER SOCIAL INSURANCE BENEFITS SHALL APPLY TO A BENEFICIARY EVEN IN RESPECT OF BENEFITS ACQUIRED UNDER A SCHEME IN ANOTHER MEMBER STATE .

6 IN ORDER TO DEFINE THE MEANING AND SCOPE OF THIS PROVISION IT MUST BE INTERPRETED IN THE LIGHT OF ARTICLES 48 TO 51 OF THE TREATY WHICH CONSTITUTE THE BASIS, THE FRAMEWORK AND THE BOUNDS OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY REGULATIONS .

7 SINCE THOSE ARTICLES ARE INTENDED TO ENSURE THE FREE MOVEMENT OF WORKERS BY CONFERRING ON THEM CERTAIN RIGHTS, TO REDUCE THE RIGHTS OF WORKERS WITHOUT CONFERRING UPON THEM THE COMPENSATING BENEFITS PRESCRIBED IN THE REGULATIONS WOULD BE TO DEPART FROM THE PURPOSE AND FRAMEWORK OF THE SAID PROVISIONS .

8 IN CASES IN WHICH THE REGULATIONS CONFER ON WORKERS SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS WHICH THEY WOULD OTHERWISE BE UNABLE TO OBTAIN, LIMITATIONS MAY BE IMPOSED ON THEM CORRESPONDING TO THE ADVANTAGES WHICH THEY DERIVE THEREFROM .

9 IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH A COUNTERBALANCE, SUCH LIMITATIONS CANNOT BE JUSTIFIED SINCE THEY WOULD RESULT IN PLACING THE WORKER IN A SITUATION LESS FAVOURABLE THAN THAT WHICH, WERE IT NOT FOR THE REGULATIONS, WOULD FOLLOW FROM THE APPLICATION OF NATIONAL LAW OR OF THE SPECIAL CONVENTIONS BETWEEN MEMBER STATES .

10 CONSEQUENTLY RESTRICTIONS, SUCH AS THOSE PROVIDED FOR OR PERMITTED BY ARTICLE 11(2 ) OF REGULATION NO 3 WITH REGARD TO CERTAIN SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS, ARE ONLY APPLICABLE TO INSURED PERSONS IF THEY ARE IN RECEIPT OF BENEFITS ACQUIRED THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF THAT REGULATION .

Decision on costs

11 THE COSTS INCURRED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, WHICH HAS SUBMITTED OBSERVATIONS TO THE COURT, ARE NOT RECOVERABLE .

12 SINCE THESE PROCEEDINGS ARE, IN SO FAR AS THE PARTIES TO THE MAIN ACTION ARE CONCERNED, IN THE NATURE OF A STEP IN THE ACTION PENDING BEFORE THE COUR D' APPEL, PARIS, THE DECISION ON COSTS IS A MATTER FOR THAT COURT .

Operative part

THE COURT

IN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION REFERRED TO IT BY THE COUR D' APPEL, PARIS, ( SOCIAL CHAMBER ) BY JUDGMENT OF 27 JUNE 1969, HEREBY RULES :

PROVISIONS IN THE LEGISLATION OF ONE MEMBER STATE FOR THE REDUCTION OR SUSPENSION OF BENEFIT WHERE THERE IS PLURALITY WITH OTHER SOCIAL INSURANCE BENEFITS ONLY APPLY, BY VIRTUE OF ARTICLE 11(2 ) OF REGULATION NO 3, TO INSURED PERSONS IF THEY ARE IN RECEIPT OF BENEFITS WHICH THEY ACQUIRED THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF THE SAID REGULATION .