CELEX: 31973Y0919(10)
Language: en
Date: 1973-02-22 00:00:00
Title: ADMINISTRATIVE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ON SOCIAL SECURITY FOR MIGRANT WORKERS DECISION NO 82 OF 22 FEBRUARY 1973 CONCERNING THE INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 17 ( 7 ) OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 574/72 RELATING TO THE GRANTING OF PROSTHESES, MAJOR APPLIANCES AND OTHER SUBSTANTIAL BENEFITS IN KIND

Avis juridique important

|

31973Y0919(10)

ADMINISTRATIVE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ON SOCIAL SECURITY FOR MIGRANT WORKERS DECISION NO 82 OF 22 FEBRUARY 1973 CONCERNING THE INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 17 ( 7 ) OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 574/72 RELATING TO THE GRANTING OF PROSTHESES, MAJOR APPLIANCES AND OTHER SUBSTANTIAL BENEFITS IN KIND  

Official Journal C 075 , 19/09/1973 P. 0012

++++DECISION NO 82  OF 22 FEBRUARY 1973  CONCERNING THE INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 17 ( 7 ) OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 574/72 RELATING TO THE GRANTING OF PROSTHESES , MAJOR APPLIANCES AND OTHER SUBSTANTIAL BENEFITS IN KIND  THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ON SOCIAL SECURITY FOR MIGRANT WORKERS :  HAVING REGARD TO ARTICLE 18 ( A ) OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1408/71 UNDER WHICH IT IS MADE RESPONSIBLE FOR DEALING WITH ALL QUESTIONS OF INTERPRETATION ARISING FROM THE PROVISIONS OF REGULATIONS ( EEC ) NOS 1408/71 AND 574/72 ;  WHEREAS DECISION NO 56 , PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES NO 53 OF 31 MARCH 1965 HAS BEEN RENDERED UNVALID BY THE ENTRY INTO FORCE OF REGULATIONS ( EEC ) NOS 1408/71 AND 574/72 , BUT , TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE PROVISIONS OF THE SAID REGULATIONS , THERE ARE GROUNDS FOR ADOPTING A NEW DECISION ON THE INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 17 ( 7 ) OF REGULATION  ( EEC ) NO 574/72 ;  WHEREAS IT IS IN FACT ESSENTIAL TO KNOW WHETHER THE SAID PROVISION OF ARTICLE 17 ( 7 ) OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 574/72 , UNDER WHICH THE GRANTING OF PROSTHESES , MAJOR APPLIANCES AND OTHER SUBSTANTIAL BENEFITS IN KIND BY THE INSTITUTION OF THE PLACE OF RESIDENCE MAY FORM THE SUBJECT OF A REASONED OBJECTION BY THE COMPETENT INSTITUTION AND WHETHER IT HAS THE EFFECT OF MAKING THE EXTENT OF THOSE BENEFITS DEPENDENT UPON THE PROVISIONS OF THE LEGISLATION OF THE COMPETENT COUNTRY WHEN THERE IS NO ABSOLUTE URGENCY AND THE COST OF THE BENEFITS IN KIND IS NOT SUBJECT TO A LUMP SUM REPAYMENT TO THE INSTITUTION OF THE PLACE OF RESIDENCE ;  WHEREAS BY STIPULATING IN PARAGRAPH 1 ( A ) THAT BENEFITS IN KIND IN THE TERRITORY OF THE CONTRY OF RESIDENCE SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE INSTITUTION OF THE PLACE OF RESIDENCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE LEGISLATION APPLIED BY THAT INSTITUTION , ARTICLE 19 OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1408/71 CLEARLY DEFINES THE AREA OF INTERVENTION OF THE LEGISLATION OF THE COMPETENT COUNTRY IN THE PROVISION OF BENEFITS IN KIND ;  WHEREAS , IN CONSEQUENCE , PROVISION IS MADE UNDER ARTICLE 17 ( 7 ) OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 574/72 , FOR REASONED OBJECTION TO BE RAISED BY THE COMPETENT INSTITUTION , THAT INSTITUTION CANNOT OBJECT TO THE GRANTING OF A BENEFIT DERIVING FROM IMPLEMENTATION OF THE LEGISLATION OF THE COUNTRY OF RESIDENCE BECAUSE THAT BENEFIT IS NOT PROVIDED FOR BY THE LEGISLATION WHICH IT APPLIES ;  WHEREAS ARTICLE 17 ( 7 ) AIMS HOWEVER , AT ENABLING THE COMPETENT INSTITUTION WHEN BEARING THE COST OF ACTUAL EXPENDITURE INCURRED IN PROVIDING BENEFITS IN KIND BY THE INSTITUTION OF THE PLACE OF RESIDENCE , TO EXERCISE CONTROL OVER THE GRANTING OF COSTLY BENEFITS IN ORDER TO AVOID ABUSES , AND WHEREAS IT IS ADVISABLE TO SPECIFY THE CRITERIA ON WHICH THAT INSTITUTION SHOULD BASE ITS OBJECTION , AFTER DELIBERATION IN THE LIGHT OF THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN IN ARTICLE 80 ( 3 ) OF REGULATION  ( EEC ) NO 1408/71 ;  HAS DECIDED :  1 . THE EXTENT OF THE BENEFITS REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 17 ( 7 ) OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 574/72 SHALL BE DETERMINED ONLY BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE LEGISLATION APPLIED BY THE INSTITUTION OF THE PLACE OF RESIDENCE .  2 . WHEN THERE IS NOT ABSOLUTE URGENCY AND WHEN THE EXPENDITURE ON BENEFITS IN KIND IS NOT SUBJECT TO A LUMP SUM REPAYMENT TO THE INSTITUTION OF THE PLACE OF RESIDENCE , THE COMPETENT INSTITUTION , IN VIEW OF THE POSSIBILITY OF OBJECTION TO THE GRANTING OF A PROSTHESIS , MAJOR APPLIANCE OR ANY OTHER SUBSTANTIAL BENEFIT IN KIND , SHALL IN PARTICULAR ASSESS THE ADVISABILITY FROM THE MEDICAL VIEWPOINT OF GRANTING SUCH A BENEFIT , PARTICULARTLY WHEN ON ITS SIDE IT HAS ALREADY PROVIDED A SIMILAR BENEFIT .  3 . THIS DECISION SHALL APPLY BY ANALOGY FOR THE INTERPRETATION OF THE PROVISION OF ARTICLE 60 ( 6 ) OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 574/72 .  4 . THIS DECISION SHALL BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES . IT SHALL APPLY TO THE SIX FOUNDER MEMBER STATES AS FROM 1 OCTOBER 1972 AND , IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TREATY OF ACCESSION , AS FROM 1 APRIL 1973 FOR THE THREE NEW MEMBER STATES .  THE PRESIDENT OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMMISSION  J . DONIS