Case C-3/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal du travail de Nivelles (Belgium) lodged on 8 January 2008 — Ketty Leyman v Institut national d'assurance maladie-invalidité (I.N.A.M.I.)
Date: 2008-01-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: free movement of workers, incapacity for work, interpretation of the law, social-security benefit

29.3.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/15

esterno [a final judgment drawn up by another court in a case
on the same subject] contains a finding on a fundamental issue
common to other cases, it has binding authority as regards that
issue, even if it was drawn up in relation to a different tax
period?’

incapacity for work, of an allowance that takes into account
the length of time worked and the period of contribution in
the type A country (Belgium)?

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the appli-
cation of social security schemes to employed persons, self-employed
persons and to members of their families moving within the Com-
munity (OJ 1971 L 149, p. 2), as amended.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal
du travail de Nivelles (Belgium) lodged on 8 January 2008
d'assurance
— Ketty

national

Leyman

Institut

v

maladie-invalidité (I.N.A.M.I.)

(Case C-3/08)

(2008/C 79/27)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal du travail de Nivelles

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ketty Leyman

Defendant: Institut national d'assurance maladie-invalidité (I.N.A.
M.I.)

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungs-
gerichtshof Baden-Württemberg (Germany)
lodged on
4 January 2008 — Michael Mario Karl Kerner v Land
Baden-Württemberg

(Case C-4/08)

(2008/C 79/28)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof Baden-Württemberg

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Michael Mario Karl Kerner

Respondent: Land Baden-Württemberg

Questions referred

Questions referred

1. Are Article 40(3)(b) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 (1) and
Article 93 of the Consolidated Laws of 14 July 1994 on
medical care and sickness insurance benefit contrary to
Article 18 of the EC Treaty in that, where a worker lives and
works in a type A country (in this case, Belgium) and moves
to a type B country (in this case,
the Grand Duchy of
Luxembourg), they do not permit, during the first year of
incapacity for work, the grant of an allowance that takes into
account the length of time worked and the period of contri-
bution in the type A country (Belgium)?

2. Are Article 40(3)(b) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 and
Article 93 of the Consolidated Laws of 14 July 1994 on
medical care and sickness insurance benefit contrary to
Article 18 of the EC Treaty in that, where a worker lives and
works in a type A country (in this case, Belgium) and moves
the Grand Duchy of
to a type B country (in this case,
Luxembourg), they give rise to discrimination to the detri-
ment of a worker exercising her right of free movement in
not permitting the grant to her, during the first year of

1. Does Article 8(4) of Council Directive 91/439/EEC of 29 July
1991 on driving licences (1) preclude the application of a
provision of national law which, in the event of a previous
withdrawal of a driving licence in the Member State in ques-
tion, makes possible recognition of a driving licence issued
by another Member State on condition that it is established
that the facts which originally led to the withdrawal of the
driving licence no longer exist, even if

— recognition of that driving licence is not required in the
interest of giving effect to the fundamental freedom of
free movement on the part of citizens of the Union,

— the driving licence was issued in the other Member State
in clear breach of the provisions of the Directive (resi-
dence requirement),

— the issuing Member State itself, when issuing the driving
licence, must have been aware of this clear breach of the
provisions of the Directive,

— according to the Member State of residence, the issuing
Member State generally refuses to annul driving licences
issued in breach of Community law,