Case C-231/06 to C-233/06: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 21 June 2007 (references for a preliminary ruling from the Cour du travail de Bruxelles, Belgium) — National Pensions Office v Emilienne Jonkman (C-231/06), Hélène Vercheval (C-232/06) and Noëlle Permesaen (C-233/06) v National Pensions Office (Equal treatment for men and women — Statutory pension scheme — Directive 79/7/EEC — Air hostesses — Grant of a pension equal to that of stewards — Payment of adjustment contributions in a single payment — Interest payments — Principle of effectiveness — Obligations on a Member State as a result of a preliminary ruling)
Date: 2007-08-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: equal treatment, gender equality, interest, interpretation of the law, pension scheme, social security, social-security contribution

4.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 183/13

Re:

Parties to the main proceedings

Reference for a preliminary ruling — College van Beroep voor
het bedrijfsleven — Interpretation of Article 6 of Commission
Decision C (95) 1753 of 16 October 1995 concerning a contri-
bution from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)
for an operational
and the European Social Fund (ESF)
the SME Community
programme within the framework of
initiative for the benefit of areas eligible under Objectives 1 and
2 in the Netherlands — Whether unconditional and sufficiently
clear and precise to be directly applicable with regard to the
final beneficiary — Interpretation of Article 38(1)(h) of Council
Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down
general provisions on the Structural Funds (OJ 1999 L 161,
p. 1) — Non-recovery, following an irregularity, vis-à-vis a bene-
ficiary who was not informed of the Commission's decision

Operative part of the judgment

Where the conditions for the grant of a financial assistance by the
Community to a Member State are set out in the grant decision but
that Member State has neither published them nor made them known
to the ultimate beneficiary of the assistance, it is not contrary to Com-
munity law to apply the principle of legal certainty so as to preclude
repayment by that beneficiary of the amounts wrongly paid, provided
that it is possible to establish the beneficiary's good faith. In such a
case, the Member State concerned may be held financially liable for the
amounts not recovered in order to give effect to the Community's right
to obtain repayment of the amount of the assistance.

(1) OJ C 60, 11.3.2006.

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 21 June 2007
(references for a preliminary ruling from the Cour du
travail de Bruxelles, Belgium) — National Pensions Office v
Emilienne
Vercheval
(C-232/06) and Noëlle Permesaen (C-233/06) v National
Pensions Office

(C-231/06), Hélène

Jonkman

(Case C-231/06 to C-233/06) (1)

(Equal treatment for men and women — Statutory pension
scheme — Directive 79/7/EEC — Air hostesses — Grant of a
pension equal to that of stewards — Payment of adjustment
contributions in a single payment — Interest payments —
Principle of effectiveness — Obligations on a Member State
as a result of a preliminary ruling)

(2007/C 183/21)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour du travail de Bruxelles

Appellants: National
(C-233/06)

Pensions Office, Noëlle

Permesaen

Respondents: Emilienne Jonkman (C-231/06), Hélène Vercheval
(C-232/06), National Pensions Office

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Cour du travail de
Bruxelles (Labour Court, Brussels) — Interpretation of Council
Directive 79/7/EEC of 19 December 1978 on the progressive
implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and
women in matters of social security (OJ 1979 L 6, p. 24) —
Possibility for a woman who was excluded from a more favour-
able pension scheme to be entitled to membership thereof retro-
actively, on making payment of the contributions relating to the
membership period in question,
in the form of a lump sum
payment, and of late payment interest

Operative part of the judgment

1. When a Member State adopts rules intended to allow persons of a
particular sex, originally discriminated against, to become eligible
throughout their retirement for the pension scheme applicable to
persons of
sex, Council Directive 79/7/EEC of
19 December 1978 on the progressive implementation of the prin-
ciple of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social
security:

the other

— does not preclude that Member State from making such
membership dependent upon the payment of adjustment contri-
butions consisting of the difference between the contributions
paid by the persons originally discriminated against
in the
period during which the discrimination took place and the
higher contributions paid by the other category of persons
during the same period, together with interest to compensate
for inflation,

— does preclude, by contrast, that Member State from requiring
that payment of adjustment contributions to be made together
with interest other than that to compensate for inflation,

sum, where

— also precludes a requirement that that payment be made as a
the adjustment
single
concerned impossible or excessively difficult in practice. That is
the case in particular where the sum to be paid exceeds the
annual pension of the interested party.

condition makes

that

2. Following a judgment given by the Court on an order for reference
from which it is apparent that the national legislation is incompa-
tible with Community law, it is for the authorities of the Member
State concerned to take the general or particular measures necessary
to ensure that Community law is complied with, by ensuring in
particular that national law is changed so as to comply with Com-
munity law as soon as possible and that the rights which indivi-
duals derive from Community law are given full effect.

C 183/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

4.8.2007

3. Where discrimination infringing Community law has been found,
for as long as measures reinstating equal treatment have not been
adopted, the national court must set aside any discriminatory provi-
sion of national law, without having to request or await its prior
removal by the legislature, and apply to members of the disadvan-
taged group the same arrangements as those enjoyed by the persons
in the other category.

(1) OJ C 190, 12.8.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 14 June 2007 —
Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of
Sweden

(Case C-333/06) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Regulation
(EC) No 261/2004 — Air transport — Denied boarding and
cancellation or long delays of flights — Compensation and
assistance to passengers — Adoption of sanctions)

(2007/C 183/23)

Language of the case: Swedish

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 14 June 2007
— Commission of the European Communities v Grand
Duchy of Luxembourg

Parties

(Case C-321/06) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive
2002/14/EC — Informing and consulting employees —
Failure to transpose within the period prescribed)

(2007/C 183/22)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: J. Enegren and G. Rozet, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (represented by: C.
Schiltz, Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to
adopt, within the period prescribed, all the provisions necessary
to comply with Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parlia-
ment and of the Council of 11 March 2002 establishing a
general framework for informing and consulting employees in
the European Community — Joint declaration of the European
Parliament,
the Council and the Commission on employee
representation (OJ 2002 L 80, p. 29)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the period prescribed, all
the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to
comply with Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament
and of
the Council of 11 March 2002 establishing a general
framework for informing and consulting employees in the European
Community, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil
its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: R. Vidal Puig and K. Simonsson, Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: A. Kruse,
Agent)

Re:

the European Parliament and of

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to take
the measures necessary to comply with Article 16 of Regulation
(EC) No 261/2004 of
the
Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on
compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of
denied boarding and of cancellation or long delays of flights,
and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1)
— Laying down of effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanc-
tions

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to lay down the sanctions for infringe-
ments of the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004
establishing common rules on compensation and assistance
to
of
event
cancellation or long delays of
flights, and repealing Regulation
(EEC) No 295/91, the Kingdom of Sweden has failed to fulfil its
obligations under Article 16 of that directive;

passengers

boarding

in the

denied

and

of

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action;

3. Orders the Kingdom of Sweden to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 212, 2.9.2006.

(1) OJ C 224, 16.9.2006.