natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
28 In particular, firstly, the use of 210 as a divisor in relation to Community migrant workers, even when fewer than 15 years of contributions were made in Spain, puts migrant workers on an unequal footing with non-migrant workers paying contributions in Spain. Indeed, for the same level of contributions as a non-migrant worker paying contributions in Spain, the Community migrant worker, whose contributions have been divided between Spain and another Member State, will have a basic amount reduced in proportion to the lesser amount of contributions paid in Spain. Such an outcome is contrary to the Community objective, set out at Article 48 TFEU, which is to avoid migrant workers from suffering a reduction in the amount of the benefit they would have received if they were not migrants (see judgment in Case C-406/93 Reichling [1994] ECR I-4061, paragraph 26, and Case C-251/94 Lafuente Nieto [1996] ECR I-4187, paragraph 38).
28 Posebno, s jedne strane upotreba broja 210 kao djelitelja u pogledu radnika migranata Zajednice, čak i u slučaju razdoblja plaćanja doprinosa u Španjolskoj koje je kraće od 15 godina, stavlja radnike migrante u neravnopravan položaj u odnosu na radnike koji nisu migranti i koji uplaćuju doprinose u Španjolskoj. Zbog doprinosa jednakih onima koje ima radnik koji nije migrant a koji uplaćuje doprinose u Španjolskoj, radnik migrant Zajednice, čiji se doprinosi dijele između Španjolske i druge države članice, imat će smanjenu osnovicu razmjerno manjem iznosu doprinosa uplaćenih u Španjolskoj. Takav bi rezultat bio u suprotnosti s ciljem Zajednice utvrđenim u članku 48. UFEU-a, a to je da se izbjegne da se radniku migrantu smanji iznos davanja koji bi dobivao da nije migrant (vidjeti presude od 9. kolovoza 1994., Reichling, C-406/93, Zb., str. I.-4061., t. 26., i od 12 rujna 1996., Lafuente Nieto, C-251/94, Zb., str. I.-4187., t. 38.).
29 Secondly, the referring court sets out that, the more a worker pays in contributions in a Member State other than the Kingdom of Spain, the less time he has during his professional life to pay contributions in Spain – which are the only ones that can be taken into account under Heading H, paragraph 4, of Annex VI to Regulation No 1408/71 – during the 15 year period set out at Article 162(1) of the LGSS. Those circumstances differentiate the situation of a migrant worker paying contributions in Spain and a non-migrant worker also paying contributions in Spain, inasmuch as the latter has the entirety of his professional life available to him to cover those 15 years of contributions.
29 S druge strane, sud koji je uputio zahtjev navodi da što više radnik uplaćuje doprinose u državi članici koja nije Kraljevina Španjolska, to mu manje vremena tijekom profesionalne karijere preostaje za plaćanje doprinosa u Španjolskoj - koji se jedini mogu uzeti u obzir u skladu s točkom 4. naslovom H Priloga VI. Uredbi br. 1408/71 - tijekom razdoblja od 15 godina utvrđenog u članku 162. stavku 1. LGSS-a. Te bi okolnosti bile značajne za razliku između situacije u kojoj je radnik migrant koji plaća doprinose u Španjolskoj i radnika koji nije migrant koji također plaća doprinose u Španjolskoj, u mjeri u kojoj potonji raspolaže cijelim vremenom svoje profesionalne karijere kako bi pokrio tih 15 godina doprinosa.
30 The Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Galicia therefore decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following questions to the Court:
30 Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Galicia je stoga odlučio prekinuti postupak i postaviti Sudu sljedeća prethodna pitanja:
‘(1) Is it in accordance with the Community objectives set out in [Article 48 TFEU and in Article 3 of Regulation No 1408/71], and with the wording of [Heading H, paragraph 4, of Annex VI to Regulation No 1408/71], to interpret that annex … to the effect that, for the calculation of the theoretical Spanish benefit carried out on the basis of the actual contributions of the insured person, during the years immediately preceding payment of the last contribution to the Spanish social security, the sum thus obtained is divided by 210, that divisor being established by the calculation of the basis for determination of the retirement pension in accordance with Article 162(1) of the LGSS?
„1.Je li u skladu s ciljevima Zajednice utvrđenima u članku 48. UFEU-a i članku 3. [Uredbe br. 1408/71], te s [točkom 4. naslovom H Priloga VI. Uredbi br. 1408/71], tumačiti taj prilog […] u smislu da se, za izračun teoretskih španjolskih davanja proveden na temelju stvarnih doprinosa osigurane osobe tijekom godina koje neposredno prethode uplati posljednjeg doprinosa španjolskom socijalnom osiguranju, iznos dobiven na taj način podijeli s brojem 210, koji je u skladu s člankom 162. stavkom 1. LGSS-a određen kao djelitelj za izračun osnovice starosne mirovine?
(2) If the first question should be answered in the negative:
2. U slučaju da je odgovor na prvo pitanje negativan:
Is it in accordance with the Community objectives set out in [Article 48 TFEU and Article 3 of Regulation No 1408/71], and [Heading H, paragraph 4, of Annex VI to that regulation], to interpret the said annex to the effect that, for the calculation of the theoretical Spanish benefit carried out on the basis of the actual contributions of the insured person, during the years immediately preceding payment of the last contribution to the Spanish social security, the sum thus obtained is divided by the number of years of contribution in Spain?
Je li u skladu s ciljevima Zajednice utvrđenima u članku 48. UFEU-a i članku 3. [Uredbe br. 1408/71], te s [točkom 4. naslovom H Priloga VI. Uredbi br. 1408/71], tumačiti taj prilog u smislu da se, za izračun teoretskih španjolskih davanja proveden na temelju stvarnih doprinosa osigurane osobe tijekom godina koje neposredno prethode uplati posljednjeg doprinosa španjolskom socijalnom osiguranju, iznos dobiven na taj način podijeli s brojem godina tijekom kojih su doprinosi uplaćivani u Španjolskoj?
(3) In the event of a negative response to the second question and whatever the answer to the first question:
.3. U slučaju da je odgovor na drugo pitanje negativan te bez obzira na odgovor na prvo pitanje:
Is [paragraph 2(a) (Spain), of Annex XI] to Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 … applicable by analogy, in the case described in these proceedings, with the aim of satisfying the Community objectives set out in [Article 48 TFEU and Article 3 of Regulation No 1408/71], and, as a result, is it possible to cover the contribution period in Portugal with the basis of contributions in Spain closest in time to that period, taking into account the evolution of consumer prices?[
Je li u slučaju opisanom u predmetnom postupku, kako bi se zadovoljio cilj Zajednice iz članka 48. UFEU-a i članka 3. [Uredbe br. 1408/71] moguća analogna primjena [stavka 2. točke (a), naslov „Španjolska”, Priloga XI. Uredbi (EZ) br. 883/2004], te je li posljedično moguće za razdoblje plaćanja doprinosa u Portugalu uzeti u obzir osnovicu doprinosa u Španjolskoj vremenski najbližu tom razdoblju, uzimajući u obzir razvoj potrošačkih cijena?
(4) If the first, second and third questions are all answered in the negative:
4. U slučaju da je odgovor na prvo, drugo i treće pitanje negativan:
What, if none of the previously mentioned interpretations were held to be wholly or partly correct, would be the interpretation of [Heading H, paragraph 4, of Annex VI to Regulation No 1408/71] that, being useful for the resolution of the dispute described in these proceedings, is most in accordance with the Community objectives set out in [Article 48 TFEU and Article 3 of Regulation No 1408/71] and with Heading H, paragraph 4, of Annex VI]?’
Ako se nijedno od prethodnih tumačenja ne smatra u cijelosti ili djelomično točnim, koje bi tumačenje [točke 4. naslova H Priloga VI. Uredbi 1408/71], pod uvjetom da je korisno za rješavanje predmetnog spora, najviše odgovaralo ciljevima Zajednice iz članka 48. UFEU-a i članka 3. [Uredbe br. 1408/71], te [točki 4. naslova H Priloga VI. toj uredbi]?”
31 By its questions, which it is appropriate to consider together, the referring court asks, in essence, whether Article 48 TFEU, Article 3 of Regulation No 1408/71 and Heading H, paragraph 4, of Annex VI, to that regulation, or paragraph 2(a) (Spain), of Annex XI to Regulation No 883/2004 preclude legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, pursuant to which the theoretical amount of the retirement pension of the self-employed worker, migrant or non-migrant, is invariably calculated on contribution bases paid by that worker over the fixed reference period of 15 years preceding the payment of his last contribution in that Member State, divided by 210, when it is impossible for either the duration of that period or the divisor used to be adapted so as to take account of the fact that the worker concerned has exercised his right to freedom of movement.
31 Svojim pitanjima, koja valja ispitati zajedno, sud koji je uputio zahtjev u biti pita jesu li članku 48. UFEU-a, članku 3. Uredbe br. 1408/71 i točki 4. naslova H Priloga VI. toj uredbi, ili stavku 2. točki (a) naslov „Španjolska” Priloga XI. Uredbi br. 883/2004, protivni propisu države članice, kao što je onaj o kojemu je riječ u glavnom postupku, na temelju kojeg se teoretski iznos starosne mirovine samozaposlenog radnika, migranta ili onog koji to nije, redovito izračunava na temelju osnovica doprinosa tog radnika za određeno referentno razdoblje od 15 godina, koje prethodi plaćanju njegovog zadnjeg doprinosa u toj državi članici, podijeljenih s 210, a da se ni trajanje tog razdoblja ni korišteni djelitelj ne mogu prilagoditi kako bi se uzela u obzir činjenica da je dotični radnik ostvario pravo na slobodu kretanja.
32 Firstly, it should be noted that, in accordance with Article 91 of Regulation No 883/2004, read in combination with Article 97 of Regulation No 987/2009, Regulation No 883/2004 is applicable only from 1 May 2010.
32 Prvo treba napomenuti da se u skladu s člankom 91. Uredbe br. 883/2004, u vezi s člankom 97. Uredbe br. 987/2009, Uredba br. 883/2004 primjenjuje tek od 1. svibnja 2010.
33 However, as appears from paragraph 16 of the present judgment, the INSS, on 9 November 2006, granted Ms Salgado González a retirement pension with effect from 1 January 2006. In addition, as also noted by the Advocate General at point 30 of his opinion, no evidence has been submitted to the Court which shows that Ms Salgado González availed herself of the opportunity left open by Article 87(5) of that regulation relating to the reassessment of her rights.
33 Međutim, kako je razvidno iz točke 16. ove presude, INSS je 9. studenoga 2006. C. Salgado González odobrio starosnu mirovinu s učinkom od 1. siječnja 2006. Nadalje, kako je također primijetio nezavisni odvjetnik u točki 30. svog mišljenja, u spisu nigdje nije navedeno da se C. Salgado González pozvala na mogućnost revizije svojih prava predviđenu člankom 87. stavkom 5. te uredbe.
34 It follows that Regulation No 883/2004 is not applicable ratione temporis to the case in the main proceedings.
34 Iz toga slijedi da se Uredba br. 883/2004 ne primjenjuje ratione temporis na predmet u glavnom postupku.
"35 In order to answer the questions raised by the national court, it must be pointed out that Regulation No 1408/71 does not set up a common scheme of social security, but allows different national social security schemes to exist; its sole objective is to ensure the coordination of those schemes. Thus, according to settled case-law, Member States retain the power to organise their social security schemes (see judgment in Case C-212/06 Government of the French Community and Walloon Government [2008] ECR I-1683, paragraph 43, and Case C-503/09 Stewart [2011] ECR I-0000, paragraph 75)."
35 Kako bi se dao odgovor na pitanja koja je postavio sud koji je uputio zahtjev, valja istaknuti da Uredba br. 1408/71 ne uspostavlja zajednički sustav socijalne sigurnosti, no dopušta postojanje različitih nacionalnih sustava i čiji je jedini cilj osigurati koordinaciju tih sustava. Iz ustaljene sudske prakse stoga proizlazi da države članice zadržavaju nadležnost prilikom organizacije svojih sustava socijalne sigurnosti (vidjeti presude od 1. travnja 2008., Gouvernement de la Communauté française i gouvernement wallon, C-212/06, Zb., str. I. - 1683. t. 43, kao i od 21. srpnja 2011., Stewart, C-503/09, Zb., str. I. - 6497., t. 75.).
36 Therefore, in the absence of harmonisation at EU level, it is for the legislation of each Member State to determine, in particular, the conditions for entitlement to benefits (see Stewart, paragraph 76 and case-law cited).
36 Sukladno tome, zbog neusklađenosti na razini Unije od zakonodavstva svake države članice očekuje se da posebno odredi uvjete za ostvarivanje prava na davanja (vidjeti prethodno navedenu presudu Stewart, t. 76. i navedenu sudsku praksu).
37 In exercising those powers, Member States must nonetheless comply with the law of the European Union and, in particular, with the provisions of the FEU Treaty giving every citizen of the Union the right to move and reside within the territory of the Member States (see Stewart, paragraph 77 and case-law cited).
37 Države članice moraju prilikom izvršavanja te ovlasti ipak poštovati pravo Europske unije te posebno odredbe UFEU-a, kojima se svakom državljanu Unije priznaje pravo na kretanje i boravak na državnom području države članice (vidjeti prethodno navedenu presudu Stewart, t. 77. i navedenu sudsku praksu).
38 In that regard, it should be noted that, under Article 45 of Regulation No 1408/71, where the legislation of a Member State makes the acquisition of the right to benefits provided for by that provision subject to the completion of periods of insurance, as in the case of a retirement pension, the competent institution of that Member State is to take account, where necessary, of the periods of insurance completed under the legislation of any other Member State. For that purpose, it is to take account of those periods as if they had been completed under its own legislation.
38 U tom pogledu valja podsjetiti da u skladu s člankom 45. Uredbe br. 1408/71, ako zakonodavstvo države članice uvjetuje stjecanje prava na davanje propisano tom odredbom navršavanjem razdoblja osiguranja, kao u slučaju starosne mirovine, nadležna ustanova te države članice treba prema potrebi voditi računa o razdobljima osiguranja navršenim na temelju zakonodavstva druge države članice. U tu se svrhu uzimaju u obzir ta razdoblja kao da su navršena prema njezinu zakonodavstvu.
39 In the case in the main proceedings, it is common ground that the INSS, in order to ascertain whether Ms Salgado González paid contributions during the minimum period of 15 years required under Article 161(1)(b) of the LGSS, took account both of the periods completed in Spain and those completed in Portugal, in accordance with Article 45 of Regulation No 1408/71.
39 U glavnom postupku nije sporno da je INSS u skladu s člankom 45. Uredbe br. 1408/71, kako bi provjerio je li C. Salgado González plaćala doprinose u minimalnom razdoblju od 15 godina predviđenom člankom 161. stavkom 1. točke (b) LGSS-a, uzeo u obzir kako razdoblja navršena u Španjolskoj tako i ona navršena u Portugalu.
40 In contrast, the referring court raises the question whether EU law precludes the methods for calculating the theoretical amount of the benefits concerned which are used by the INSS.
40 Suprotno tome, sud koji je uputio zahtjev pita protive li se pravu Unije metode izračunavanja teoretskog iznosa predmetnog davanja koje je upotrijebio INSS.
41 In that regard, it should be noted that under Article 46(2)(a) of Regulation No 1408/71, the theoretical amount of that benefit must be calculated as if the insured person had worked exclusively in the Member State concerned (Case C-30/04 Koschitzki [2005] ECR I-7389, paragraph 27).
41 U tom pogledu valja podsjetiti da se na temelju članka 46. stavka 2. točke (a) Uredbe br. 1408/71 teoretski iznos tog davanja mora izračunati kao da je osigurana osoba obavljala svoju profesionalnu djelatnost isključivo u predmetnoj državi članici (presuda od 21. srpnja 2005., Koschitzki, C-30/04, Zb., str. I. - 7389., t. 27.).
42 In addition, Article 47 of Regulation No 1408/71 lays down additional provisions for the calculation of benefits. In particular, in subparagraph (1)(g), it provides that where, under the legislation of a Member State, benefits are calculated on the basis of average contributions, the competent institution is to determine that average by reference only to those periods of insurance completed under the legislation of that State. In addition, Heading H of Annex VI to Regulation No 1408/71, which sets out the specific rules for the application of the Spanish legislation, states at subparagraph (4)(a) that under Article 47 of that regulation, the calculation of the theoretical Spanish benefit is to be carried out on the basis of the insured person’s actual contributions during the years immediately preceding payment of the last contribution to Spanish social security.
42 Osim toga, članak 47. Uredbe br. 1408/71 propisuje dodatne odredbe za izračun davanja. U stavku 1. točki (g) posebno se propisuje da kada zakonodavstvo države članice predviđa da se izračun davanja temelji na prosječnim davanjima, nadležna ustanova određuje taj prosjek samo s obzirom na razdoblja osiguranja navršena prema zakonodavstvu te države. Osim toga, naslov H Priloga VI. Uredbi br. 1408/71 koji određuje posebna pravila za primjenu španjolskog zakonodavstva, u stavku 4. točki (a) navodi da se prema članku 47. te uredbe izračun teoretskog španjolskog davanja provodi na temelju stvarnih doprinosa osigurane osobe tijekom godina koje su neposredno prethodile plaćanju zadnjeg doprinosa španjolskom sustavu socijalnog osiguranja.
43 As appears from settled case-law, Articles 46(2) and 47(1) of Regulation No 1408/71 must be interpreted in the light of the objective laid down by Article 48 TFEU, which implies in particular that migrant workers must not suffer a reduction in the amount of their social security benefits as a result of having availed themselves of their right of free movement (Reichling, paragraphs 21 and 22, and Lafuente Nieto, paragraph 33).
43 Kako je razvidno iz ustaljene sudske prakse, članak 46. stavak 2. i članak 47. stavak 1. treba tumačiti s obzirom na cilj utvrđen člankom 48. UFEU-a, iz kojega posebno proizlazi da radnici migranti ne smiju pretrpjeti smanjenje iznosa svojih socijalnih davanja zbog toga što su iskoristili svoje pravo na slobodu kretanja (vidjeti prethodno navedene presude Reichling, t. 21. i 22., i Lafuente Nieto, t. 33.).
44 However, in the context of the award of the benefit at issue in the main proceedings, the INSS calculated the theoretical amount of Ms Salgado González’s retirement pension in accordance with the rule set out under Article 162(1) of the LGSS, pursuant to which that amount must be calculated on the basis of an average contribution.
44 Međutim, u okviru plaćanja davanja o kojemu je riječ u glavnom postupku, INSS je izračunao teoretski iznos starosne mirovine C. Salgado González u skladu s pravilom iz članka 162. stavka 1. LGSS-a, prema kojem taj iznos treba izračunati na temelju prosječnog doprinosa.
45 Admittedly, for the purpose of recognising the right to a benefit, it took account of the Portuguese contributions as if they had been periods completed for the purposes of the Spanish legislation, in accordance with Article 45 of Regulation No 1408/71.
45 S ciljem priznavanja prava na davanja, LGSS je u skladu s člankom 45. Uredbe br. 1408/71 svakako uzeo u obzir portugalske doprinose kao da su bili razdoblja navršena u skladu sa španjolskim zakonodavstvom.
46 Nonetheless, the implication of Article 47(1)(g) of Regulation No 1408/71 is that the calculation of the average contribution basis relies on the amount of the contributions paid under the legislation concerned alone (see, by analogy, Lafuente Nieto, paragraph 39).
46 Unatoč tome, članak 47. stavak 1. točka (g) Uredbe 1408/71 navodi da se izračun prosječnog temeljnog doprinosa temelji na iznosu samih doprinosa plaćenih u skladu sa zadanim zakonodavstvom (vidjeti analogijom prethodno navedenu presudu Lafuente Nieto, t. 39.).
47 It appears in that regard that, when calculating the theoretical amount of the benefit at issue in the main proceedings, the INSS did not calculate Ms Salgado González’s average contribution by reference only to the insurance periods in Spain during the years immediately preceding the payment of the last contribution to Spanish social security, as required by Article 47(1)(g) of Regulation No 1408/71 and Heading H, paragraph 4(a), of Annex VI thereto.
47 Iz toga je razvidno da u okviru izračuna teoretskog iznosa davanja o kojemu je riječ u glavnom postupku, INSS nije izračunao prosječni doprinos C. Salgado González samo s obzirom na razdoblja osiguranja u Španjolskoj koje je navršila tijekom godina koje neposredno prethode uplati posljednjeg doprinosa španjolskom socijalnom osiguranju, u skladu sa zahtjevima članka 47. stavka 1. točke (g) Uredbe br. 1408/71 i naslova H stavka 4. točke (a) njezinog Priloga VI.
48 In fact, Ms Salgado González contributed to the Spanish social security system from 1 February 1989 to 31 March 1999, for a total of 3 711 days, i.e. approximately 10 years and 2 months, whereas the INSS adds a credited period running from 1 April 1984 to 30 January 1989 in order to fulfil the requirement of contributions spanning a period of 15 years preceding Ms Salgado González’s last Spanish contribution. This calculation allowed the INSS to obtain a numerator to which to apply the divisor of 210 set out under Article 162(1) of the LGSS, and thus ascertain the average contribution basis required to calculate the basic amount of the retirement pension.
48 C. Salgado González je naime plaćala doprinose španjolskom sustavu socijalne sigurnosti od 1. veljače 1989. do 31. ožujka 1999., ukupno 3711 dana, tj. približno 10 godina i dva mjeseca, dok je INSS u izračun dodao fiktivno razdoblje plaćanja doprinosa od 1. travnja 1984. do 30. siječnja 1989. kako bi ispunio uvjet plaćanja doprinosa za razdoblje od 15 godina koje prethode uplati posljednjeg doprinosa C. Salgado González u španjolski sustav. Tim je izračunom INSS želio dobiti brojnik koji bi podijelio s brojem 210 utvrđenim u članku 162. stavku 1. LGSS-a, te tako izračunati prosječni osnovni iznos starosne mirovine.
49 Nonetheless, as Ms Salgado González did not pay contributions between 1 April 1984 and 31 March 1989, the INSS in its calculation took account of insurance periods which were not completed in Spain. Those periods having necessarily been calculated as zero, taking them into account had the effect of reducing Ms Salgado González’s average contribution basis.
49 Međutim, budući da C. Salgado González nije uplaćivala doprinose u razdoblju između 1. travnja 1984. i 31. ožujka 1989., INSS je u izračunu uzeo u obzir razdoblja osiguranja koja nisu bila navršena u Španjolskoj. S obzirom da je za ta razdoblja iznos doprinosa izračunan kao nula, njihovo uzimanje u obzir dovelo je do smanjenja prosječne osnovice doprinosa Salgado González.
50 However, it must be stated that no such reduction would have been made if Ms Salgado González had paid contributions only in Spain, without exercising her right to freedom of movement. In other words, contrary to the requirements set out in Article 46(2)(a) of Regulation No 1408/71, as they are set out at paragraph 41 of the present judgment, the theoretical amount of Ms Salgado González’s retirement pension was not calculated as if she had carried out the entirety of her professional life exclusively in Spain.
50 Međutim, treba pojasniti da do takvog smanjenja ne bi došlo da je C. Salgado González plaćala doprinose samo u Španjolskoj, bez ostvarivanja prava na slobodu kretanja. Drugim riječima, protivno zahtjevima iz članka 46. stavka 2. točke (a) Uredbe br. 1408/71, kako su navedeni u točki 41. ove presude, teoretski iznos starosne mirovine C. Salgado González nije bio izračunan na način kao da je cijelu svoju profesionalnu djelatnost obavljala isključivo u Španjolskoj.