Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 7 July 2005 in Case C-153/03: (Reference for a preliminary ruling, Cour de cassation) Caisse nationale des prestations familiales v Ursula Schwarz, née Weide (Family benefits — Child-raising allowance — Suspension of entitlement to the benefits in the State of employment — Entitlement to similar benefits in the State of residence)
Date: 2005-09-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law, family benefit, interpretation of the law, migrant worker, residence, social security

C 229/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

17.9.2005

2. Orders Rica Foods (Free Zone) NV to pay the costs;

designated as being directly entitled to the family allowances by the
legislation of that State.

3. Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Kingdom of Spain

and the French Republic to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 146 of 21.6.2003

(1) OJ C 83 of 05.04.2003.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 7 July 2005

(Reference for a preliminary ruling,
in Case C-153/03:
Cour de cassation) Caisse nationale des prestations famil-
iales v Ursula Schwarz, née Weide (1)

(Family benefits — Child-raising allowance — Suspension of
entitlement to the benefits in the State of employment —
Entitlement to similar benefits in the State of residence)

(2005/C 229/03)

(Language of the case: French)

In Case C-153/03, reference for a preliminary ruling under
Article 234 EC by the Cour de cassation (Luxembourg), made
by decision of 6 March 2003, received at the Court on 3 April
2003, in the proceedings Caisse nationale des prestations famil-
iales and Ursula Schwarz, née Weide,
(First
Chamber), composed of P.
Jann, President of the Chamber,
N. Colneric, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues (Rapporteur), M. Ilešič and E.
Levits, Judges; J. Kokott, Advocate General; M. Múgica Arza-
mendi, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judg-
ment on 7 July 2005, in which it ruled:

the Court

Article 10(1)(b)(i) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 574/72 of 21
March 1972 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation
(EEC) No 1408/71 on the application of social security schemes to
employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their
families moving within the Community, as amended and updated by
Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of 2 December 1996, must be
interpreted as meaning that the exercise by the spouse of the person
entitled to a family benefit in pursuance of Article 73 of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971, as amended and
updated by Regulation No 118/97, of a professional or trade activity
in the Member State of residence of the children suspends entitlement
to allowances in pursuance of Article 73 of Regulation No 1408/71
up to the amount of the child-raising allowances provided for by the
irrespective of who is
legislation of the Member State of residence,

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Third Chamber)

of 7 July 2005

in Case C-227/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Rechtbank te Amsterdam in A.J. van Pommeren-Bour-
gondiën v Raad van bestuur van de Sociale verzekerings-
bank (1)

(Social security — Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 — Scope
— Invalidity benefit — Continued entitlement to benefits
after transfer of residence to another Member State)

(2005/C 229/04)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

In Case C-227/03: reference for a preliminary ruling under
Article 234 EC from the Rechtbank te Amsterdam (Nether-
lands), made by decision of 21 May 2003, received at the
Court on 26 May 2003, in the proceedings between A.J. van
Pommeren-Bourgondiën and Raad van bestuur van de Sociale
verzekeringsbank — the Court (Third Chamber), composed of
Puissochet
A. Rosas,
(Rapporteur), S. von Bahr, U. Lõhmus and A. Ó Caoimh,
Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General; H. von Holstein, Deputy
Registrar, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 7 July 2005,
the operative part of which is as follows:

the Chamber,

President

J.P.

of

Article 39 EC precludes legislation of a Member State pursuant to
which a person who has ceased all occupational activity in its territory
remains compulsorily insured in respect of some branches of social
security only if he continues to reside there, whilst that person remains
compulsorily insured under the legislation of that Member State in
respect of certain other branches of social security even if his residence
is in another Member State, in circumstances where the conditions
relating to voluntary insurance, in respect of the branches for which
compulsory insurance has ceased, are less favourable than those
relating to compulsory insurance.

(1) OJ C 171 of 19.7.2003.