CELEX: C2006/224/37
Language: en
Date: 2006-09-16 00:00:00
Title: Case C-267/06: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bayerisches Verwaltungsgericht München (Germany) lodged on 20 June 2006 — Tadao Maruko v Versorgungsanstalt der deutschen Bühnen

16.9.2006   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 224/20
            
         Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bayerisches Verwaltungsgericht München (Germany) lodged on 20 June 2006 — Tadao Maruko v Versorgungsanstalt der deutschen Bühnen
   (Case C-267/06)
   (2006/C 224/37)
   Language of the case: German
   Referring court
   Bayerisches Verwaltungsgericht München
   Parties to the main proceedings
   
      Applicant: Tadao Maruko
   
      Defendant: Versorgungsanstalt der deutschen Bühnen
   Questions referred
   
               1.
            
            
               Is a compulsory professional pension scheme, such as the scheme at issue in this case administered by the Versorgungsanstalt der deutschen Bühnen, a scheme similar to state schemes as referred to in Article 3(3) of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (1)?
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Are benefits paid by a compulsory professional pension institution to survivors in the form of widow's/widower's allowance to be construed as pay within the meaning of Article 3(1)(c) of Directive 2000/78/EC?
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Does Article 1 in conjunction with Article 2(2)(a) of Directive 2000/78/EC preclude regulations governing a supplementary pension scheme of the kind at issue here under which a registered partner does not receive a survivor's pension after the death of the partner like spouses do, even though he also lives in a caring and committed union formally entered into for life like spouses?
            
         
               4.
            
            
               If the preceding questions are answered in the affirmative: Is discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation permissible by virtue of recital 22 in the preamble to Directive 2000/78/EC?
            
         
               5.
            
            
               Would entitlement to the survivor's pension be restricted to periods from 17 May 1990 in the light of the case-law in Barber (Case C-262/88)?
            
         
      (1)  OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16