Case C-189/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Eparkhiako Dikastirio Lefkosias (District Court, Nicosia, Cyprus) lodged on 16 April 2014  — Bogdan Chain v Atlanco Ltd
Date: 2014-04-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative formalities, free movement of workers, labour relations, work contract








C_2014202EN.01001202.xml










30.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 202/12





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Eparkhiako Dikastirio Lefkosias (District Court, Nicosia, Cyprus) lodged on 16 April 2014 — Bogdan Chain v Atlanco Ltd
(Case C-189/14)
2014/C 202/14
Language of the case: Greek

Referring court

Eparkhiako Dikastirio Lefkosias (District Court, Nicosia, Cyprus)

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Bogdan Chain

Defendant: Atlanco Ltd

Questions referred







1)


Should the fact that the scope of Article 13(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 (1) and of Article 14(5)(b) of the implementing Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 (2) covers ‘a person who normally pursues an activity as an employed person in two or more Member States’ be interpreted as meaning that it also covers the situation where a person is employed, under an employment contract with only one employer who is established in a Member State of the European Union, with a view to working in two other Member States even if:






i.


the second Member State in which the person is to be employed has not yet been determined and is not foreseeable when an application is made for the issue of the A1 form [statement of applicable legislation] due to the specific nature of the work, i.e. the temporary employment of workers for short periods of time in various Member States?
or










ii.


the duration of employment in the first and/or second Member State cannot yet be determined or is unforeseeable due to the specific nature of the work, i.e. the temporary employment of workers for short periods of time in various Member States?














2)


If the answer to the questions stated under point 1 above is in the affirmative, is it possible to interpret Article 14(5)(b) of the implementing Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 in such a way that, for the purpose of applying Article 13(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004, the reference to ‘a person who normally pursues an activity as an employed person in two or more Member States’ also applies to a situation in which there are periods of inactivity between two jobs undertaken in different Member States, during which periods the employee is still covered by the same employment agreement?










3)


If the answer to the questions stated under point 1 above is in the affirmative, should the fact that the competent Member State does not issue the A1 form preclude application of Article 13(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004?










4)


Do Articles 16(5) and/or 20(1) or any other article of the implementing Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 require the Member State, based on a preliminary decision relating to the applicable law from the Member State of stay, to issue the A1 form on its own initiative without the need for the employer concerned to file an additional application to the competent Member State?






(1)  Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems (OJ 2004 L 166, p. 1).

(2)  Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems (OJ 2009 L 284, p. 1).