Judgment of the Court of 29 January 1975. - M. Angelo Alaimo v Préfet du Rhône. - Reference for a preliminary ruling: Tribunal administratif de Lyon - France. - Case 68-74.



European Court reports 1975 Page 00109

Greek special edition Page 00051

Portuguese special edition Page 00055



Summary

Parties

Subject of the case

Grounds

Decision on costs

Operative part



Keywords

++++

FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT - WORKERS - NATIONALS OF A MEMBER STATE - EMPLOYMENT IN THE TERRITORY OF ANOTHER MEMBER STATE - CHILDREN - EDUCATION - ADMISSION UNDER THE SAME CONDITIONS AS THE NATIONALS OF THE HOST STATE - SCOPE

( REGULATION NO 1612/68 OF THE COUNCIL, ARTICLE 12, FIRST PARAGRAPH )

Summary

IN PROVIDING THAT THE CHILDREN OF A NATIONAL OF A MEMBER STATE WHO IS OR HAS BEEN EMPLOYED IN THE TERRITORY OF ANOTHER MEMBER STATE SHALL BE ADMITTED TO EDUCATIONAL COURSES 'UNDER THE SAME CONDITIONS AS THE NATIONALS' OF THE HOST STATE, ARTICLE 12 OF REGULATION NO 1612/68 ENSURES FOR THE CHILDREN REFERRED TO AN EQUAL POSITION WITH REGARD TO ALL THE RIGHTS ARISING FROM SUCH ADMISSION .

Parties

IN CASE 68/74

REFERENCE TO THE COURT UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY BY THE TRIBUNAL ADMINISTRATIF, LYON, FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING IN THE ACTION PENDING BEFORE THAT COURT BETWEEN

ANGELO ALAIMO

AND

PREFET DU RHONE

Subject of the case

ON THE INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 12 OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1612/68 OF THE COUNCIL OF 15 OCTOBER 1968 ON FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT FOR WORKERS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY ( OJ, SPECIAL EDITION 1968 ( II ), P . 475 ),

Grounds

1 BY JUDGMENT DATED 5 SEPTEMBER 1974, RECEIVED AT THE COURT ON 16 SEPTEMBER 1974, THE TRIBUNAL ADMINISTRATIF, LYON, REFERRED FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY A QUESTION ON THE INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 12 OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1612/68 OF THE COUNCIL OF 15 OCTOBER 1968 ON FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT FOR WORKERS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY ( OJ SPECIAL EDITION 1968 ( II ), P . 475 ).

2 IT APPEARS FROM THE FILE THAT THE PLAINTIFF IN THE MAIN ACTION REQUESTED THE ANNULMENT OF A DECISION OF THE PREFET DU RHONE REFUSING AN EDUCATIONAL GRANT FROM THE DEPARTMENT FOR HIS DAUGHTER ON THE GROUND THAT 'THE CONSEIL GENERAL DU RHONE...HAS DECIDED TO RESTRICT ITS FINANCIAL AID SOLELY TO PUPILS OF FRENCH NATIONALITY .'

3 SINCE THE ABOVE-MENTIONED ARTICLE 12 LAYS DOWN THAT 'THE CHILDREN OF A NATIONAL OF A MEMBER STATE WHO IS OR HAS BEEN EMPLOYED IN THE TERRITORY OF ANOTHER MEMBER STATE SHALL BE ADMITTED TO THAT STATE'S GENERAL EDUCATIONAL, APPRENTICESHIP AND VOCATIONAL TRAINING COURSES UNDER THE SAME CONDITIONS AS THE NATIONALS OF THAT STATE, IF SUCH CHILDREN ARE RESIDING IN ITS TERRITORY', THE QUESTION IS ASKED WHETHER SUCH EQUALITY OF TREATMENT IS LIMITED TO THE CONDITIONS OF ENROLMENT IN COURSES OR EXTENDS TO ALL THE RIGHTS ARISING FROM ADMISSION TO SUCH EDUCATIONAL COURSES .

4 REGULATION NO 1612/68, ACCORDING TO THE FIFTH RECITAL OF ITS PREAMBLE, WAS ADOPTED IN PARTICULAR ON THE GROUND THAT 'THE RIGHT OF FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT, IN ORDER THAT IT MAY BE EXERCISED, BY OBJECTIVE STANDARDS, IN FREEDOM AND DIGNITY, REQUIRES ... THAT OBSTACLES TO THE MOBILITY OF WORKERS SHALL BE ELIMINATED, IN PARTICULAR AS REGARDS THE WORKER'S RIGHT TO BE JOINED BY HIS FAMILY AND THE CONDITIONS FOR THE INTEGRATION OF THAT FAMILY INTO THE HOST COUNTRY '.

5 IT FOLLOWS FROM THE JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF 3 JULY 1974 IN CASE 9/74, DONATO CASAGRANDE V LANDESHAUPTSTADT MUNCHEN ( 1974 ) ECR 773 THAT SUCH INTEGRATION PRESUPPOSES THAT, IN THE CASE OF THE CHILD OF A FOREIGN WORKER WHO WISHES TO BE ADMITTED TO AN EDUCATIONAL COURSE, THAT CHILD MAY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF BENEFITS PROVIDED BY THE LAWS OF THE HOST COUNTRY RELATING TO EDUCATIONAL GRANTS, UNDER THE SAME CONDITIONS AS NATIONALS WHO ARE IN A SIMILAR POSITION .

6 IN THAT CASE IT WAS THEREFORE RULED THAT 'ARTICLE 12 REFERS NOT ONLY TO RULES RELATING TO ADMISSION, BUT ALSO TO THE GENERAL MEASURES INTENDED TO FACILITATE EDUCATIONAL ATTENDANCE '.

7 THE PRESENT PROCEEDINGS RELATING TO A SIMILAR CASE HAVE DISCLOSED NO ISSUE OF FACT OR OF LAW OF SUCH A NATURE AS TO LEAD TO A DIFFERENT INTERPRETATION OF THIS PROVISION .

8 IT IS THEREFORE NECESSARY TO REPLY THAT ARTICLE 12 OF REGULATION NO 1612/68 MUST BE INTERPRETED AS ENSURING FOR THE CHILDREN REFERRED TO AN EQUAL POSITION WITH REGARD TO ALL THE RIGHTS ARISING FROM SUCH ADMISSION .

Decision on costs

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

10 SINCE THESE PROCEEDINGS ARE, IN SO FAR AS THE PARTIES TO THE MAIN ACTION ARE CONCERNED, A STEP IN THE ACTION PENDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ADMINISTRATIF, LYON, THE DECISION ON COSTS IS A MATTER FOR THAT COURT .

ON THOSE GROUNDS,

Operative part

THE COURT

IN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION REFERRED TO IT BY THE TRIBUNAL ADMINISTRATIF, LYON, BY JUDGMENT DATED 8 SEPTEMBER 1974, HEREBY RULES :

ARTICLE 12 OF REGULATION NO 1612/68 MUST BE INTERPRETED AS ENSURING FOR THE CHILDREN REFERRED TO AN EQUAL POSITION WITH REGARD TO ALL THE RIGHTS ARISING FROM ADMISSION TO EDUCATIONAL COURSES .