CELEX: C2002/274/03
Language: en
Date: 2002-11-09 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court of 17 September 2002 in Case C-413/99 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Immigration Appeal Tribunal): Baumbast, R v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Freedom of movement for persons — Migrant worker — Rights of residence of members of the migrant worker's family — Rights of the children to pursue their studies in the host Member State — Articles 10 and 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 — Citizenship of the European Union — Right of residence — Directive 90/364/EEC — Limitations and conditions)

C 274/2                  EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                       9.11.2002
2.    Community law does not prohibit a Member State from                   the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance
      resisting actions for repayment of charges levied in breach of        and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (OJ 1999 L 226, p. 26), in so far
      Community law by relying on a time-limit under national law           as it imposes on the Federal Republic of Germany a flat-rate
      of three years, by way of derogation from the ordinary rules          correction of 5 % to the expenditure declared in respect of
      governing actions between private individuals for the recovery of     financial support in the arable crops sector in Mecklenburg-
      sums paid but not due, for which the period allowed is more           Vorpommern, equal to the sum of DEM 30 394 115,33,
      favourable, provided that that time-limit applies in the same         instead of 2 %, equal to the sum of DEM 12 157 646,13 —
      way to actions based on Community law for repayment of such           the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: P. Jann, President of
      charges as to those based on national law.                            the Chamber, S. von Bahr (Rapporteur), D.A.O. Edward,
                                                                            A. La Pergola, and C.W.A. Timmermans, Judges; C. Stix-
3.    Community law precludes the adoption by a Member State of             Hackl, Advocate General; M.-F. Contet, Administrator, for the
      provisions making repayment of a tax held to be contrary to           Registrar, has given a judgment on 19 September 2002, in
      Community law by a judgment of the Court, or whose                    which it:
      incompatibility with Community law is apparent from such a
      judgment, subject to conditions relating specifically to that tax
      which are less favourable than those which would otherwise be         1.    Dismisses the action;
      applied to repayment of the tax in question.
                                                                            2.    Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.
( 1) OJ C 226 of 7.8.1999.
                                                                            (1 ) OJ C 366 of 18.12.1999.
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                           (Fifth Chamber)
                                                                                             JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                      of 19 September 2002
                                                                                                 of 17 September 2002
in Case C-377/99: Federal Republic of Germany v Com-
           mission of the European Communities (1)
                                                                            in Case C-413/99 (Reference for a preliminary ruling
                                                                            from the Immigration Appeal Tribunal): Baumbast, R v
(EAGGF — Clearance of accounts — 1995 financial year                               Secretary of State for the Home Department (1)
                           — Arable crops)
                                                                            (Freedom of movement for persons — Migrant worker —
                           (2002/C 274/02)                                  Rights of residence of members of the migrant worker’s
                                                                            family — Rights of the children to pursue their studies in
                                                                            the host Member State — Articles 10 and 12 of Regulation
                    (Language of the case: German)
                                                                            (EEC) No 1612/68 — Citizenship of the European Union —
                                                                            Right of residence — Directive 90/364/EEC — Limitations
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published                                and conditions)
                    in the European Court Reports)
                                                                                                     (2002/C 274/03)
In Case C-377/99, Federal Republic of Germany (Agents:
                                                                                               (Language of the case: English)
initially by W.-D. Plessing and C.-D. Quassowski and sub-
sequently W.-D. Plessing and B. Muttelsee-Schön) v Com-
mission of the European Communities (Agents: M. Niejahr and
G. Braun) — application for partial annulment of Commission
Decision 1999/596/EC of 28 July 1999, amending Decision
1999/187/EC on the clearance of the accounts presented by                   In Case C-413/99: Reference to the Court under Article 234
the Member States in respect of the expenditure for 1995 of                 EC by the Immigration Appeal Tribunal (United Kingdom) for
 ---pagebreak--- 9.11.2002               EN                        Official Journal of the European Communities                                              C 274/3
a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that                                    JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
court between Baumbast, R and Secretary of State for the
Home Department, on the interpretation of Article 18 EC and                                            (Sixth Chamber)
Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council of
15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers
within the Community (OJ, English Special Edition 1968 (II),                                       of 24 September 2002
p. 475), the Court, composed of: G.C. Rodríguez Iglesias,
President, P. Jann, F. Macken (Rapporteur), N. Colneric and                  in Case C-471/99 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
S. von Bahr (Presidents of Chambers), C. Gulmann,                            the Sozialgericht Nürnberg): Alfredo Martínez Domín-
D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola, J.-P. Puissochet, M. Wathelet,                 guez, Joaquín Benítez Urbano, Agapito Mateos Cruz,
V. Skouris, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues and C.W.A. Timmermans,                      Carmen Calvo Fernández v Bundesanstalt für Arbeit,
Judges; L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Adminis-                                         Kindergeldkasse ( 1)
trator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 17 September
2002, in which it has ruled:
                                                                             (Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 — Articles 77 and 78 —
                                                                             Pensioners under the legislation of several Member States
                                                                             — Pensioners under a social-security convention between
1.    Children of a citizen of the European Union who have installed         Member States concluded prior to accession to the European
      themselves in a Member State during the exercise by their              Communities — Benefits for dependent children and for
      parent of rights of residence as a migrant worker in that              orphans of pensioners — Entitlement to family benefits for
      Member State are entitled to reside there in order to attend           which the competent institution of a Member State other
      general educational courses there, pursuant to Article 12 of           than that of residence is responsible — Conditions of
      Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council of 15 October                                            entitlement)
      1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the
      Community. The fact that the parents of the children concerned                                    (2002/C 274/04)
      have meanwhile divorced, the fact that only one parent is a
      citizen of the Union and that parent has ceased to be a migrant
                                                                                                 (Language of the case: German)
      worker in the host Member State and the fact that the children
      are not themselves citizens of the Union are irrelevant in this
      regard.                                                                (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                                                                                                 in the European Court Reports)
2.    Where children have the right to reside in a host Member State
      in order to attend general educational courses pursuant to
                                                                             In Case C-471/99: Reference to the Court under Article 177
      Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68, that provision
                                                                             of the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) by the Sozialgericht
      must be interpreted as entitling the parent who is the primary
                                                                             Nürnberg (Germany) for a preliminary ruling in the proceed-
      carer of those children, irrespective of his nationality, to reside
                                                                             ings pending before that court between Alfredo Martínez
      with them in order to facilitate the exercise of that right
                                                                             Domínguez, Joaquín Benítez Urbano, Agapito Mateos Cruz,
      notwithstanding the fact that the parents have meanwhile
                                                                             Carmen Calvo Fernández and Bundesanstalt für Arbeit, Kinder-
      divorced or that the parent who has the status of citizen of the
                                                                             geldkasse, on the interpretation of Articles 77(2)(b), 78(2)(b)
      European Union has ceased to be a migrant worker in the host
                                                                             and 79(1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of
      Member State.
                                                                             14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to
                                                                             employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members
                                                                             of their families moving within the Community, as amended
3.    A citizen of the European Union who no longer enjoys a right           and updated by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2001/83 of
      of residence as a migrant worker in the host Member State can,         2 June 1983 (OJ 1983 L 230, p. 6), the Court (Sixth
      as a citizen of the Union, enjoy there a right of residence by         Chamber), composed of: F. Macken, President of the Chamber,
      direct application of Article 18(1) EC. The exercise of that right     C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), R. Schintgen, V. Skouris and
      is subject to the limitations and conditions referred to in that       J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General;
      provision, but the competent authorities and, where necessary,         L. Hewlett, Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a
      the national courts must ensure that those limitations and             judgment on 24 September 2002, in which it has ruled:
      conditions are applied in compliance with the general principles
      of Community law and, in particular, the principle of pro-
                                                                             Articles 77(2)(b) and 78(2)(b) of Council Regulation (EEC) No
      portionality.
                                                                             1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security
                                                                             schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to
                                                                             members of their families moving within the Community, as amended
                                                                             and updated by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2001/83 of 2 June
( 1) OJ C 6 of 8.1.2002.                                                     1983, and read in conjunction with Article 79(1) thereof, must be
                                                                             interpreted as meaning that the competent institution of a Member
                                                                             State other than that of the residence of a person in receipt of an old-
                                                                             age or invalidity pension, or of the residence of orphans of a deceased
                                                                             worker, is not required to grant the persons concerned benefits for
                                                                             dependent children or for orphans where the conditions laid down by