natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Den 16. marts 1977 blev han syg og blev erklæret uarbejdsdygtig fra den 16. marts til den 14. maj 1977.
See first part, III, Case­law of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, Case 27/75.
Den 15. maj 1977 vendte han tilbage til Forbundsrepublikken Tyskland og anmodede den 16. maj arbejdsformidlingskontoret i Göttingen om at få tilkendt arbejdsløs hedsunderstøttelse, idet han hævdede, at han på grund af sin sygdom havde været forhindret i at vende tilbage til Forbundsrepublikken inden for den foreskrevne frist på tre måneder.
5268­2 — In Case 40/76 (Slavica Kermaschek ν Bundes­anstalt für Arbeit — Judgment of 23 November 1976), the question was whether the spouse of a national of a Member State could apply for unemployment benefits in accordance with Articles 67 and 70 of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 even though she was not a national of a Member State and the potential entitlement to benefit had been acquired before marriage.
Da sagsøger i hovedsagen ikke opfyldte betingelserne i den nederlandske lov om tvungen forsikring for arbejds tagere mod økonomiske følge af ufrivillig arbejdsløshed (»Werkloosheidswet«), modtog hun dog fra den 1. oktober 1975 ydelser ved arbejdsløshed i henhold til den nederlandske lov om offentlige tilskud til arbejdsløse arbejdstagere (»Wet Werkloosheidsvoorziening«, herefter benævnt W.W.V.).
As she did not fulfil the conditions required under the Dutch Law on compulsory insurance of workers against the financial consequences of involuntary unemploy­ment ('Werkloosheidswet'), she received as from 1 Octo­ber 1975, the benefit provided for under the Dutch Law laying down rules for public allowances for unemployed workers ('Wet Werkloosheidsvoorziening', WWV).
Samme dato lod hun sig registrere som arbejds søgende ved den belgiske Rijksdienst voor Arbeidsvoorziening (statsligt kontor for arbejdsanvisning) og ansøgte om ydelser ved arbejdsløshed fra denne myndighed. Ved indgivelsen af denne begæring påberåbte hun sig artikel 69 i Rådets forordning nr. 140871, hvorefter »en helt arbejdsløs arbejdstager, der opfylder de i en medlemsstats lovgivning foreskrevne betingelser for ret til ydelser, og som rejser til en eller flere andre medlems stater for at søge beskæftigelse dér, bevarer sin ret til ydelser« under og inden for de i denne artikel angivne betingelser og grænser.
On registering with the Belgian Rijksdienst voor Arbeidsvoorziening she applied to it for unemployment benefit relying on the provisions of Arti­cle 69 of Regulation No 1408/71 according to which 'a worker who is wholly unemployed and who satisfies the conditions of the legislation of a Member State for entitlement to benefits and who goes to one or more other Member States in order to seek employment there shall retain his entitlement to such benefits' under the conditions and within the limits indicated in that article.
Tvisten vedrørte klassificeringen af ydelser ved arbejds løshed, som den pågældende havde modtaget i Nederlandene.
The dispute concerned the classification of the unem­ployment benefits the person concerned had received ¡n the Netherlands.
Åbner den nederlandske lov, hvorefter disse ydelser var blevet tilkendt, mulighed for påberåbelse af artikel 69 i forordning nr. 1408/71, når denne lov i Nederlandene ikke er en lov om social sikring men om social forsorg?
Could the provisions of the Dutch law pursuant to which benefits had been provided, be invok­ed with regard to Article 69 of Regulation No 1408/71 if that law was one on social assistance and not social security?
»Den omstændighed, at en medlemsstat i den i artikel 5 i forordning nr. 140871 omhandlede erklæring har angivet en bestemt lov, må anses som bevis for, at ydelser, som tildeles i henhold til denne lov, er sociale sikringsydelser i den i nævnte forordning forudsatte betydning.«
The person concerned was a national of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia who had married a German worker and who had therefore resigned her employment and her residence in the Netherlands.
det tilkommer de pågældende myndigheder at kontrol lere, om arbejdstageres udnyttelse af sin ret efter artikel 69 i forordning nr. 140871 er i overensstemmelse med formålet med dens indførelse;
As the relevant law was expressly mentioned in the Dutch declaration (OJ C 12, 24.3.1973), specifying, as laid down by Articles 5 and 96 of Regulation No 1408/71, which legislation and schemes referred to in Article 4 (1) and (2) fell within the scope of the regulations, the Court of Justice, after recording that the fact that a national law or regulation had not been specified in the declaration referred to in Article 5 of the regulation was not of itself proof that the law or regulation did not fall within the field
Det drejede sig om en retssag mellem en italiensk statsborger med bopæl i Forbundsrepublikken Tyskland, og Bundesanstalt für Arbeit, hvori sagsøgeren vil kendes berettiget til fortsat af have krav på arbejdsløshedsydel det tilkommer derfor de kompetente myndigheder og institutioner i medlemsstaterne i hvert konkret tilfælde at bedømme, om de faktiske omstændigheder, som påberåbes til støtte for en anmodning om forlængelse af fristen
Following the refusal by the competent institution to grant her an unemployment allowance because the periods of employment did not correspond to a potential entitlement to that benefit, the Court of Justice to which the case had been referred for a preliminary ruling by a German Court, gave the following ruling:
efter artikel 69, stk. 2, i forordning nr. 140871, kan begrunde et »undtagelsestilfælde«;
5271 prevent not only the return of the unemployed person to the competent State within the period prescribed, but also the submission of a claim for extension before the expiry of the period.
Fristen i henhold til artikel 69, stk. 2 i forordning nr. 140871 kan forlænges, selv når anmodningen om forlængelse er indgivet etter fristens udløb.
of application of the said regulation, ruled, however, that 'the fact that a Member State has specified a law in its declaration under Article 5 of Regulation No 1408/71 must be accepted as proof that the benefits granted on the basis of that law are social security benefits within the meaning of the said regulation'.
Udbetaling af ydelser samt refusioner
5268­4 — Case 139/79 (Giovanni Coccioli ν Bundesan­stalt für Arbeit — Judgment of 20 March 1979).
Denne bestemmelse begrænser ikke medlemsstaternes kompetente myndigheders pg institutioners frihed til ved deres afgørelse af, om forordningens frist kan forlænges, at tage alle de omstændigheder, de finder relevante, i betragtning, såvel vedrørende de pågældende arbejdsta geres individuelle situation som udøvelsen af en effektiv kontrol.
Having regard also to the fact that it is for the authorities concerned to verify whether the use made by the worker of the right conferred upon him by Article 69 of Regula­tion No 1408/71 has been in conformity with the purpose for which it was intended; it is in consequence for the competent services and institutions of the Member States to assess in actual cases the factual circumstances of an 'exceptional case' adduced in support of a claim for extension of the period provided for in Article 69 (2) of Regulation No 1408/71.
5280 — Arbejdsløshedsydelser udbetales i de i artikel 69, stk. 1 omhandlede tilfælde (se nr. 5260) af institutionen i hver af de medlemsstater, hvor den arbejdsløse søger beskæftigelse.
The case was brought by an Italian national residing in the Federal Republic of Germany against the German Office of Employment.
De refunderes senere af den kompetente institution i den medlemsstat, af hvis lovgivning arbejds tageren eller den selvstændige erhvervsdrivende har været omfattet under sin seneste beskæftigelse.
The claimant wanted to have his entitlement to maintenance of unemployment benefit recognized by means of an extension of the three­month period provided for under Article 69 (2) of Regulation No 1408/71.
5281 — I princippet refunderes disse ydelser på grundlag af de faktiske udgifter, som er blevet afholdt af institutio nen i den medlemsstat, hvortil den pågældende er rejst for at søge beskæftigelse.
The person concerned had been awarded unemployment assistance provided by German law which had been paid to him from 13 December 1976 to 18 December 1976.
5268-5 — I overensstemmelse med artikel 69, stk. 2, i forordning nr. 140871 mister en arbejdsløs, som ikke vender tilbage til det kompetente land inden udløbet af den i samme artikels stk. 1 omhandlede tremåneders periode, retten til ydelser i henhold til denne stats lovgivning, undtagen i særtilfælde, når fristen forlænges af det kompetente arbejdsformindlingskontor eller den kompetente institution.
An extension of the period referred to ¡n Article 69 (2) of Regulation No 1408/71 is permissible even when the claim Is made after the expiry of that period.
I de forenede sager 4179, Testa, 12179, Maggio og 79679, Vitale, er der blevet stillet spørgsmål vedrørende fortolkningen og gyldigheden af denne bestemmelse af de tyske sociale sikringsinstitutioner, som var af den opfattelse, at en arbejdstager, der oppebærer arbejdsløs hedsydelser, og som vender tilbage til det kompetente land, efter udløbet af fristen på tre måneder mister enhver ret til ydelser, selv i det tilfælde, hvor arbedstageren i henhold til nævnte stats lovgivning har et retskrav på ydelser.
That provision does not restrict the freedom of the competent services and the institutions of the Member States to take into consideration, with a view to deciding upon any extension of the period laid down by the legislation, all factors which they regard as relevant and which are inherent both in the individual situation of the workers concerned and In the exercise of effective. control.
— Afdeling 3 — Arbejdsløse, som under deres seneste beskæftigelse var bosat i en anden medlemsstat end den kompetente stat
5268­5 — In accordance with Article 69 (2) of Regulation No 1408/71, a worker who does not return to the compe­tent State before the expiry of the period of three months laid down In paragraph 1 of the same article loses all entitlement to benefits under the legislation of that State; in exceptional cases, this time limit may be extended by the competent services or institutions.
»En arbejdstager, som vender tilbage til den kompetente medlemsstat efter udløbet af tremåneders fristen i artikel 69, stk. 1, litra c), er i henhold til artikel 69, stk. 2, 1. punkt, ikke længere berettiget til ydelser i den kompe tente stat, medmindre fristen er forlænget i henhold til artikel 69, stk. 2, 2. punkt.« Se nr. 722.
This provision was called into question in Joined Cases 41/79 (Tesfa), 121/79 (Meggio) and 796/79 (Vitale) by the German social security institutions which were of the opinion that a person receiving unemployment benefits who returned to the competent State after the expiry of the three­month period loses all entitlement to benefits, even if the person concerned has a residual entitlement under the domestic legislation of that Member State.
5290 — I denne afdeling er fastsat, på hvilke betingelser en arbejdsløs arbejdstager kan gøre krav på ydelser ved arbejdsløshed.
On 15 May 1977 he returned to the Federal Republic of Germany and on the 16th of the same month he request­ed the German Office of Employment that he be paid unemployment assistance, claiming that by reason of his illness he had been prevented from returning to the Federal Republic within the three months prescribed.
5291 — En grænsearbejder, der er delvis eller periodisk arbejdsløs, har ret til ydelser ved arbejdsløshed efter bestemmelserne i den kompetente stats lovgivning, som om han var bosat på dennes område, og ydelserne udbetales af den kompetente institution i denne stat.
The Employment Office rejected his claim arguing that an exceptional extension of the period of three months within the meaning of Article 69 (2), second sentence, of Regulation No 1408/71 was not possible; the stay of the claimant had ceased to be justified in respect of the search for work, long before the occurrence of the incapacity for work; it was recognized that there was an absence of any possibility of finding work in the area to which he had gone to look for work and that by extending, for other reasons, his stay in Italy, the clai­mant would have to accept the risk of unforeseeable events occurring which might prevent him from returning within the right time to the Federal Republic.
5271—Arbejdsløshedskontrollen foretages efter de regler, der er fastsat i lovgivningen i det land, hvortil den arbejdsløse er rejst.
This restrictive interpretation was upheld by the Court which in its judgment of 19 June 1980 ruled as follows:
5292 — En grænsearbejder, der er helt arbejdsløs, har ret til ydelser ved arbejdsløshed efter bestemmelserne i bopælslandets lovgivning, som om han havde været omfattet af denne lovgivning under sin seneste beskæftigelse. Ydelserne udbetales af bopælsstedets ¡nstitution for denne institutions regning.
— A worker who returns to the competent State after the expiry of the period of three months referred to in Article 69 (1) (c) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 may no longer claim enti­tlement, by virtue of the first sentence of Article 69 (2), to benefits as against the competent State unless the said period is extended pursuant to the second sentence of Article 69 (2).
5293-5294 åben.
5269 and 5270 not used.
5295 — Arbejdstagere, bortset fra grænsearbejdere, som er bosat i en anden medlemsstat end den kompetente stat, har ret til ydelser efter bestemmelserne i artikel 71, stk. 1, litra b), /') og /'/') i forordning nr. 140871.
Having regard to the fact that Article 69 (1) (c) of Regulation No 1408/71 allows a worker who is wholly unemployed and who satisfies the conditions required by the legislation of one Member State for entitlement to unemployment benefits to go to one or more other Member States to search for work whilst maintaining his entitlement to benefits for a maximum period of three months as from the date when he ceased to be at the disposal of the employment services of the State he left, that Article 69 (2), second sentence, of Regulation No 1408/71 allows the competent services or institutions to extend 'in exceptional cases ' the three­month period to which the maintenance of benefit envisaged in the provision is made subject; that Article 69 (2) of Regulation No 1408/71 does not provide that the claim for extension must necessarily be presented before the expiry of the period; that among 'exceptional cases' capable of justifying an extension of the period, some may be of a type which
5296 — En arbejdstager, som er delvis eller periodisk arbejdsløs, har ret til ydelser ved arbejdsløshed, som udbetales af den kompetente ¡nstitution, forudsat at han
5271 —The procedure for checking on the unemployed person is carried out according to the methods laid down by the legislation of the country to which the unemployed person has gone.
5272 —To eller flere medlemsstater kan, efter indhentet udtalelse fra Den administrative Kommission, aftale andre gennemførelsesregler.
It is up to the institution of that country to notify the competent institution of the date on which the unemployed person registered, of the date of commencement of payment of benefit and of the occur­rence of any contingency which may affect entitlement to
FÆLLESSKABSBESTEMMELSER OM SOCIAL SIKRING står til rådighed for arbejdsformidlingen eller for sin arbejdsgiver i den kompetente stat.
5295 — Employed persons other than frontier workers who reside in a Member State other than the competent State receive benefits In accordance with the provisions of Article 71 (1) (b) (i) and (ii) of Regulation No 1408/71.
5297 — En arbejdstager, der er helt arbejdsløs, har ret til ydelser ved arbejdsløshed, som udbetales af institutionen på bopælsstedet, som om han senest havde været beskæftiget i den medlemsstat, hvor han er bosat, forud sat at han stiller sig til rådighed for arbejdsformidlingen i denne stat.
5297 — An employed person who is wholly unemployed may receive unemployment benefits provided by the institution of his place of residence as if he had last been employed in the Member State where he is residing, on condition that he makes himself available to the employ­ment services of that State.
»En helt arbejdsløs arbejdstager, der senest var beskæftiget i en anden medlemsstat end bopælsstaten, men af et i bopælsstaten registreret firma, og som for denne beskæftigelses vedkommende var omfattet af beskæftigelseslandets lovgivning, er i medfør af artikel 71, stk. 1, litra b), ¡i) i forordning nr. 140871 berettiget til arbejds løshedsydelser i henhold til den nationale lovgivning i den stat, hvor han bor, og på hvis område den arbejdsformidling, for hvilken han stiller sig til rådighed, er beliggende«. gende«.
5280 — In the cases referred to in Article 69 (1) (see No 5260), unemployment benefits are provided by the institution of each of the Member States to which the person concerned goes to seek employment. They are reimbursed by the institution of the Member State to whose legislation the employed or self­employed person was subject at the time of his last employment.
En helt arbejdsløs arbejdstager, som har opnået ydelser for den kompetente institutions regning i den medlems stat, af hvis lovgivning han senest har været omfattet, kan fortsat få udbetalt disse ydelser under de betingelser og inden for de grænser, der er anført i nr. 5260-5266.
However, a wholly unemployed, formerly employed per­son who had been awarded benefit to the charge of the competent institution of the Member State to whose legislation he was last subject, continues to receive his benefit under the conditions and limits indicated in Nos 5260 to 5266.
5297-1 — Ovenstående bestemmelser finder, foruden på sæsonarbejdere og for så vidt de pågældende er bosat i en anden medlemsstat end den kompetente stat, anvendelse på: arbejde.
5297­1—The preceding provisions apply, apart from seasonal workers and in the case where the person concerned lives In the territory of a Member State other than the competent State:
Se første del, 112, Afgørelser og henstillinger fra Den administra stemmelse, at den arbejdsløshedsforsikringsordning, der tive Kommission nr. 94.
See first part, 11­2, Decisions and recommendations of the Administrative Commission, No 94.
— internationale transportarbejdere;
— to workers in international transport,
— arbejdstagere (bortset fra internationale transportarbejdere), der normalt udfører deres arbejde på flere medlemsstaters område;
— to workers other than those ¡n international transport who normally carry out their acti­vity within the territories of several Member States,
— arbejdstagere beskæftiget af en virksomhed beliggende i et grænseområde.
— to workers employed by an undertaking in frontier areas.
skal anvendes på sådanne arbejdstagere, er ordningen efter den nationale lovgivning i den medlemsstat, hvor den arbejdsformidling befinder sig, som de stiller sig til rådighed for, og på hvis område de er bosatte eller vender tilbage til.
— Section 3 — Unemployed persons who during their last employment resided in a Member State other than the competent State
Ved anvendelsen af afgørelse nr. 94, bør man ligeledes henholde sig til de domme, som De europæiske Fælles skabers Domstol har afsagt i sag 3976 og sag 7676.
With regard to the application of Decision 94, see also the judgments of the Court in Cases 39/76 and 76/76.
Nedenfor nr. 5299-1 og 5299-2.
See Nos 5299­1 and 5299­2.
Se tørsfe del, 112, Afgørelser og henstillinger fra Den administra tive Kommission nr. 100.
5298—In its Decision 100 of 23 January 1975 (OJ C 150, 5.7.1975), the Administrative Commission stated that 'cash benefits provided in compliance with the provi­sions of...
5299 — Anvendelsen af artikel 71 i forordning nr. 1408/71 har givet anledning til flere afgørelser fra Domstolen.
Article 71 (1) (b) (¡i), penultimate sentence, of Regulation No 1408/71 (benefits envisaged in No 5296 supra), by the institution of the place of residence or stay, on behalf of the competent institution must be fully reimbursed by the latter in the currency of the country of residence or stay'.
Spørgsmålet var især, om den undtagelse fra hovedreglen, artikel 74, stk. 1, litra b), ii) indeholder, både med hensyn til sammenlægning af perioder og udbetaling af ydelser, kun finder anvendelse i de tilfælde, der er omhandlet i Den administrative Kommissions afgørelse nr. 94 af 24. januar 1974 (jf. ovenfor nr. 5297), eller om
5291 —A frontier worker who is partially or intermittently unemployed receives benefits in accordance with the legislation of the competent State and provided by the competent institution of that State, as if he were residing there.
Se tørsfe del, III, Domme afsagt af De europæiske Fællesskabers den derimod gør det muligt for bopælsstaten også i andre
See first part 11­2, Decisions and recommendations of the Administrative Commission, No 100.
5299-1 —Sag 3976. Bestuur der Bedrijfsvereniging voor de Metaalnijverheid, Haag mod M.L.J. Mouthaan (dom af 15. december 1976).
See first part, No 741.
Den franske Cour de Cassation har anmodet Domstolen om at træffe præjudiciel afgørelse af følgende spørgsmål: vende tilbage til sine forældre i Belgien.
The question was asked in an action concerning an Italian national who was born in Italy on 14 June 1951 and who came to Belgium in 1965 with her parents.
Da hun var uden arbejde i Belgien, indgav hun en begæring om ydelser ved arbejdsløshed til Office national de l'emploi (den belgiske arbejdsformilding).
As she was then unemployed, she had applied to the Belgian Office National de l'Emploi for unemployment benefits.
Til støtte for sin begæring, anførte hun dels artikel 67, stk. 1 i forordning nr. 140871, hvorefter der ved afgørelsen af, om der er erhvervet ret til ydelser ved arbejdsløshed, skal foretages en sammenlægning af forsikrings- eller beskæftigelses perioder, og dels artikel 71, stk. 1, litra b), ¡i) i forordning nr. 140871, som, ¡følge sagsøgerinden, gav hende ret til ydelser ved arbejdsløshed i henhold til belgisk lovgiv ning, da hun under sit ophold i Det forenede Kongerige havde bevaret sin bopæl i Belgien, idet hun havde bevaret »centret for sine interesser og gøremål« i Belgien, som følge at sin families bopæl i dette land.
In sup­port of her application she relied on Article 67 (1) of Regulation No 1408/71 which provides that periods of insurance or employment shall be aggregated for the purposes of opening entitlement to unemployment bene­fits and on Article 71 (1) (b) (ii) of the said regulation which, according to the claimant, entitled her to benefits under Belgian legislation as, during her stay in the United Kingdom, she had maintained her residence in Belgium which was the 'habitual centre of her interests' because her family resided in that State.
Office national de l'emploi belge afviste disse anbringender, især med den begrundelse, at sagsøgerinden, der kun havde arbejdet i én medlemsstat (Det forenede Kongerige), ikke senest havde tilbagelagt forsikringspe rioder efter den lovgivning, i henhold til hvilken ydelserne begæredes, og at undtagesen li artikel 71, stk. 1, litra b), ii) ikke kunne finde anvendelse i denne sag, da den pågældende ikke var omfattet af de kategorier af arbejds tagere, som udtømmende er opregnet i afgørelse nr. 94 fra Den administrative Kommission.
The Belgian Office National de l'Emploi rejected this argument on the grounds that as the claimant who had worked in only one Member State (the United Kingdom), had not completed periods of insurance as required by the legislation under which she was making application for benefit and that the exception provided for in Arti­cle 71 (1) (b) (il) could not apply in this case, the claimant was not a worker referred to in Decision 94 of the Administrative Commission.