WRITTEN QUESTION E-1114/02 by Luigi Cocilovo (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Legislative measures planned by the Commission in response to the European Court of Justice ruling of 15 January 2002 (Case C-55/2000).
Date: 2002-04-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European citizenship, application of EU law, case-law (EU), discrimination on the basis of nationality, equal treatment, pension scheme, third country, transfer of pension rights

29.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 205 E/253

Concerning the other questions put by the Honourable Member, it should be recalled that the correct
application of national health and safety measures adopted to transpose the Community Directives is the
responsibility of the Member States. The Commission cannot act unless it receives information that is
evidence of systematic failure to apply the national
legislation in accordance with the Directives. The
Commission has had no indication of any application of the national provisions that would be contrary to
the Directives mentioned above.

(1) Council Directive 83/477/EEC of 19 September 1983 on the protection of workers from the risks related to
exposure to asbestos at work (second individual Directive within the meaning of Article 8 of Directive 80/1107/
EEC), OJ L 263, 24.9.1983.

(2) Council Directive 91/382/EEC of 25 June 1991 amending Directive 83/477/EEC on the protection of workers from
the risks related to exposure to asbestos at work (second individual Directive within the meaning of Article 8 of
Directive 80/1107/EEC).

(3) Council Directive 98/24/EC of 7 April 1998 on the protection of the health and safety of workers from the risks
related to chemical agents at work (fourteenth individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive
89/391/EEC).

(4) OJ C 304 E, 30.10.2001.

(2002/C 205 E/282)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1114/02

by Luigi Cocilovo (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 April 2002)

Subject: Legislative measures planned by the Commission in response to the European Court of Justice

ruling of 15 January 2002 (Case C-55/2000)

Articles 12 and 39 of the EC Treaty prohibit all forms of discrimination on grounds of nationality between
citizens of the Member States. On 15 January 2002 the Court of Justice issued its judgment in Case No
55/2000 (Gottardo v INPS). The question referred to the Court under Article 234 of the EC Treaty
concerned the refusal by authorities in a Member State to allow a European citizen who was a national of
another Member State to benefit from pension provisions contained in a bilateral agreement concluded
with a third country, these provisions being applicable solely to nationals of the two contracting parties.
The Court drew attention to the implications of Article 39 and pointed out that a Member State must, for
the purposes of determining pension rights, take account of periods of insurance completed in a Member
State by nationals of another Member State in all instances where they would take account of such periods
in respect of their own nationals.

In the light of the above and given that there are many European citizens who could benefit from this
ruling, what legislative proposals has the Commission made or does it intend to make to the European
Parliament and the Council to ensure that Member States comply with the Court’s decision?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(7 May 2002)

In accordance with the Gottardo ruling (1), the advantages arising from a bilateral agreement between a
Member State and a third country must be granted to workers from other Member States which are not
party to the agreement; this is based on the principle of equal treatment of nationals and workers from
other Member States, as provided by Article 39 of the EC Treaty.

Following this ruling, the Commission asked the Member States to inform it of any practical difficulties
related to the application of this case law and of the measures they planned to take to ensure that the
various agreements complied with the Court of Justice ruling. The Commission is currently examining the
Member States’ responses.

(1) Case C-55/00 > European Court Reports 2002.