OPTIONAL BASIS WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 4 OF SECTION IV OF ANNEX G TO REGULATION NO 3 OF THE COUNCIL ".
2 AS WORDED, THE QUESTION SEEMS TO HAVE THE PURPOSE OF INTERPRETING THE MOROCCAN DAHIR OF 12 AUGUST 1913 SO AS TO DETERMINE THE AMBIT OF THE FRENCH LEGISLATION REFERRED TO IN SECTION IV B OF ANNEX G TO REGULATION NO 3 .
3 THE COURT, WHILST HAVING JURISDICTION TO INTERPRET THE PROVISIONS OF COMMUNITY LAW, HAS NO JURISDICTION IN THE CONTEXT OF ARTICLE 177 TO RULE ON PROVISIONS OF INTERNAL LAW .
4 HOWEVER, IT MAY EXTRACT FROM THE QUESTION REFERRED THOSE ELEMENTS WHICH RELATE SOLELY TO THE INTERPRETATION OF SECTION IV B OF ANNEX G TO REGULATION NO 3 .
5 UNDER SECTION IV B OF ANNEX G TO THAT REGULATION, THE FRENCH LAW NO 65/555 OF 10 JULY 1965, GRANTING FRENCH NATIONALS WHO ARE OR WERE ENGAGED IN OCCUPATIONS ABROAD THE OPTION OF JOINING A VOLUNTARY OLD-AGE INSURANCE SCHEME, IS APPLIED TO NATIONALS OF THE OTHER MEMBER STATES SUBJECT TO TWO CONDITIONS .
6 UNDER THE FIRST CONDITION, THE OCCUPATION GIVING RISE TO VOLUNTARY INSURANCE UNDER THE FRENCH SCHEME MUST NOT BE OR HAVE BEEN ENGAGED IN EITHER ON FRENCH TERRITORY OR ON THE TERRITORY OF THE STATE OF WHICH THE WORKER IS A NATIONAL .
7 IN ADDITION, THE WORKER MUST AT THE TIME OF APPLYING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE LAW, PRODUCE EVIDENCE EITHER THAT HE HAS BEEN RESIDENT IN FRANCE FOR AT LEAST TEN YEARS - WHETHER OR NOT CONSECUTIVE - OR THAT HE HAS BEEN SUBJECT TO FRENCH LEGISLATION ON A COMPULSORY OR OPTIONAL CONTINUED BASIS DURING THE SAME PERIOD .
8 IT APPEARS FROM THE FILE SUPPLIED BY THE NATIONAL COURT THAT THE CASE BEARS PARTICULARLY ON THE QUESTION WHETHER THE PLAINTIFF IN THE MAIN ACTION, AN ITALIAN NATIONAL, WHO HAS WORKED NEITHER ON FRENCH TERRITORY NOR IN ITALY BUT IN MOROCCO, WAS SUBJECT TO FRENCH LEGISLATION ON A COMPULSORY OR OPTIONAL CONTINUED BASIS .
9 THUS, IN ORDER TO KNOW WHETHER THE CASE FALLS WITHIN ANNEX G, IT APPEARS NECESSARY TO INQUIRE FIRST WHETHER THE PERSON CONCERNED HAS RESIDED IN FRANCE FOR AT LEAST TEN YEARS .
10 THAT IS A QUESTION OF FACT, WHICH IT IS NOT FOR THE COURT OF JUSTICE BUT FOR THE NATIONAL COURT TO DECIDE .
11 HOWEVER, THE BENEFIT OF ANNEX G MAY ALSO BE CLAIMED IF THE WORKER HAS BEEN SUBJECT FOR AT LEAST TEN YEARS TO FRENCH LEGISLATION ON A COMPULSORY OR OPTIONAL CONTINUED BASIS .
12 THAT QUESTION, WHICH CONCERNS SOLELY THE APPLICATION OF FRENCH LAW, OR POSSIBLY OF MOROCCAN LAW, IS NOT AS SUCH ONE WHICH THE COURT OF JUSTICE HAS JURISDICTION TO DECIDE .
13 ONLY IF THE NATIONAL COURT WERE TO CONSIDER THAT THE PLAINTIFF IN THE MAIN ACTION WAS SUBJECT TO FRENCH LEGISLATION WOULD SHE, AS A CONSEQUENCE, HAVE UNDER ANNEX G THE OPTION OF JOINING THE VOLUNTARY OLD-AGE INSURANCE SCHEME .
14 IN THAT CONNEXION