Case C-406/04: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal du travail de Bruxelles (17th Chamber), by judgment of that court of 8 September 2004 in the case of Gérald de Cuyper v Office national de l'emploi
Date: 2004-11-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Belgium, free movement of persons, interpretation of the law, older worker, residence, unemployment insurance

20.11.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 284/11

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal du
travail de Bruxelles (17th Chamber), by judgment of that
court of 8 September 2004 in the case of Gérald de
Cuyper v Office national de l'emploi

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Hoge Raad der
Nederlanden by order of that court of 24 September 2004
in the case of Staatssecretaris van Financiën against
Stichting Kinderopvang Enschede

(Case C-406/04)

(2004/C 284/21)

(Case C-415/04)

(2004/C 284/22)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by the Tribunal du travail de Bruxelles
(Labour Court, Brussels) (17th Chamber) by judgment of that
court of 8 September 2004, in the case of Gérald de Cuyper v
Office national de l'emploi, received at the Court Registry on
23 September 2004.

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by order of the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden
(Supreme Court of the Netherlands) of 24 September 2004,
received at the Court Registry on 29 September 2004, for a
preliminary ruling in the case of Staatssecretaris van Financiën
against Stichting Kinderopvang Enschede on the following
question:

The Tribunal de travail de Bruxelles (17th Chamber) has asked
the Court to give a preliminary ruling on the following ques-
tions:

‘Does the obligation actually to reside in Belgium, which under
Article 66 of the Royal Decree of 25 November 1991 regu-
lating unemployment is a condition for the award of benefits,
applied to an unemployed person aged over 50 who enjoys an
exemption under Article 89 of that Royal Decree from the
requirement to sign on which entails dispensation from the
requirement to be available for work, amount to a fetter on the
freedom of movement and residence of all European citizens
under Articles 17 and 18 of the Treaty establishing the Euro-
pean Community?

Does the obligation of residence in the State competent to
award unemployment benefits, justified in domestic law by the
needs of monitoring compliance with the statutory require-
ments for the payment of benefits to unemployed persons,
satisfy the requirement of proportionality which must be
observed in the pursuit of that objective of general interest in
that it constitutes a limitation on the freedom of movement
and residence of all European citizens under Articles 17 and 18
of the Treaty establishing the European Community?

Does that residence requirement not have the effect of discrimi-
nating between European citizens who are nationals of a
Member State competent to award unemployment benefits by
affording that entitlement to those who do not exercise the
right to freedom of movement and residence of all European
citizens under Articles 17 and 18 of the Treaty, whilst denying
it to those who do seek to exercise that right, by the deterrent
effect which that restriction entails?’

Must Article 13.A(1)(g), (h) and (i) of the Sixth Directive (1) be
construed as meaning that the service provided as described
above, consisting in intermediary activities in connection with
the care of children under school age and of schoolchildren
outside of school hours in the homes of host parents, falls to
be regarded as a service covered by one or more of those provi-
sions?

(1) OJ L 145 of 13.6.1977, p. 1.

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Cour d'Appel de
Poitiers (2ème Chambre Civile) by order of that court of
21 September 2004 in the case of Conseil Général de la
Vienne against Directeur Général des Douanes et Droits
Indirects

(Case C-419/04)

(2004/C 284/23)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by order of the Cour d'Appel de Poitiers
(2ème Chambre Civile) (Court of Appeal, Poitiers, France – 2nd
Civil Chamber) of 21 September 2004 received at the Court
Registry on 30 September 2004, for a preliminary ruling in the
case of Conseil Général de la Vienne against Directeur Général
des Douanes et Droits Indirects on the following question: