CELEX: C2006/143/23
Language: en
Date: 2006-06-17 00:00:00
Title: Case C-423/04: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of  27 April 2006  (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Social Security Commissioner) — Sarah Margaret Richards v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security — Directive 79/7/EEC — Refusal to award a retirement pension at the age of 60 to a transsexual who has undergone male-to-female gender reassignment surgery)

17.6.2006   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 143/13
            
         Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 27 April 2006 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Social Security Commissioner) — Sarah Margaret Richards v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
   (Case C-423/04) (1)
   
   (Equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security - Directive 79/7/EEC - Refusal to award a retirement pension at the age of 60 to a transsexual who has undergone male-to-female gender reassignment surgery)
   (2006/C 143/23)
   Language of the case: English
   Referring court
   Social Security Commissioner
   Parties to the main proceedings
   
      Applicant: Sarah Margaret Richards
   
      Defendant: Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
   Re:
   Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social Security Commissioner — Interpretation of Articles 4 and 7 of Council Directive 79/7/EEC of 19 December 1978 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security — Refusal to award a retirement pension at the age of 60 to a male-to-female transsexual, the age at which entitlement to such a pension would have arisen if that person had been born female.
   Operative part of the judgment
   The Court:
   
               1.
            
            
               Article 4(1) of Council Directive 79/7/EEC of 19 December 1978 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security is to be interpreted as precluding legislation which denies a person who, in accordance with the conditions laid down by national law, has undergone male-to-female gender reassignment entitlement to a retirement pension on the ground that she has not reached the age of 65, when she would have been entitled to such a pension at the age of 60 had she been held to be a woman as a matter of national law.
            
         
               2.
            
            
               There is no need to limit the temporal effects of this judgment.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 300, 4.12.2004.