1 BY A JUDGMENT OF 30 JUNE 1982 WHICH WAS RECEIVED AT THE COURT ON 7 JULY 1983 , THE COUR D ' APPEL ( COURT OF APPEAL ), ROUEN REFERRED TO THE COURT FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY A QUESTION AS TO THE INTERPRETATION OF REGULATION NO 1408/71 OF THE COUNCIL OF 14 JUNE 1971 ON THE APPLICATION OF SOCIAL SECURITY SCHEMES TO EMPLOYED PERSONS AND THEIR FAMILIES MOVING WITHIN THE COMMUNITY ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL , ENGLISH SPECIAL EDITION , 1971 ( II ), P . 416 ).
2 THE QUESTION WAS RAISED IN THE CONTEXT OF AN APPEAL BROUGHT BY THE CAISSE PRIMAIRE D ' ASSURANCE MALADIE ( LOCAL SICKNESS INSURANCE FUND , HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS ' ' THE FUND ' ' ), ROUEN , AGAINST A DECISION OF THE COMMISSION DE PREMIERE INSTANCE DE SECURITE SOCIALE ( SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD OF FIRST INSTANCE ) ORDERING IT TO PAY THE RESPONDENT IN THE MAIN ACTION THE SUMS CORRESPONDING TO REIMBURSEMENTS FOR MEDICAL EXPENSES INCURRED BETWEEN JANUARY AND MARCH 1978 AND TO DAILY ALLOWANCES IN RESPECT OF INCAPACITY FOR WORK .
3 THE RESPONDENT IN THE MAIN PROCEDINGS , OF GERMAN NATIONALITY , RESIGNED FROM HER EMPLOYMENT IN THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY ON 30 JUNE 1977 . ON 1 AUGUST 1977 SHE REGISTERED WITH THE GERMAN EMPLOYMENT AUTHORITIES AS A PERSON SEEKING EMPLOYMENT . SHE WENT TO FRANCE IN SEPTEMBER 1977 TO REJOIN HER HUSBAND , SETTLED PERMANENTLY THERE , AND REGISTERED WITH THE AGENCE NATIONALE POUR L ' EMPLOI ( NATIONAL EMPLOYMENT AGENCY ). FOR THREE MONTHS SHE RECEIVED GERMAN UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFIT AND SUBSEQUENTLY SHE RECEIVED UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFIT FROM THE ASSOCIATION POUR L ' EMPLOI DANS LES INDUSTRIES ET LE COMMERCE ( ASSEDIC ) ( ASSOCIATION FOR EMPLOYMENT IN INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE ).
4 THE FUND REFUSED TO REIMBURSE HER FOR MEDICAL EXPENSES ON THE GROUNDS THAT ARTICLE 25 OF REGULATION NO 1408/71 GAVE UNEMPLOYED MIGRANT WORKERS THE RIGHT TO SICKNESS AND MATERNITY BENEFITS ONLY IF THEY WERE ALSO ENTITLED TO UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS . ACCORDING TO THE FUND , THE RESPONDENT IN THE MAIN PROCEEDINGS WAS NOT ENTITLED TO FRENCH UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS BECAUSE SHE HAD NOT WORKED IN FRANCE BEFORE BECOMING UNEMPLOYED .
5 IN ORDER TO DECIDE THE DISPUTE THE COUR D ' APPEL STAYED THE PROCEEDINGS AND SUBMITTED THE FOLLOWING QUESTION TO THE COURT OF JUSTICE : ' ' IN THE CASE ENVISAGED BY ARTICLE 71 ( 1 ) ( B ) ( II ) OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1408/71 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES OF 14 JUNE 1971 , IS RESIDENCE IN THE COMPETENT STATE PRIOR TO THE END OF THE PERIOD OF LAST EMPLOYMENT IN THE MEMBER STATE OTHER THAN THE COMPETENT STATE ONE OF THE CONDITIONS FOR OBTAINING THE BENEFITS REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 71? ' '
6 THE PROVISION WHICH THE COURT IS ASKED TO INTERPRET MUST BE PLACED IN ITS CONTEXT . IT IS CONTAINED IN CHAPTER 6 OF REGULATION NO 1408/71 , WHICH DEALS WITH UNEMPLOYMENT . ACCORDING TO THE SYSTEM ESTABLISHED BY THAT CHAPTER , THE UNEMPLOYED PERSON MUST APPLY TO THE COMPETENT INSTITUTION IN THE MEMBER STATE IN WHICH HE WAS LAST EMPLOYED IN ORDER TO OBTAIN THE UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS PROVIDED FOR . IF THE UNEMPLOYED PERSON LEAVES THAT MEMBER STATE FOR THE PURPOSE OF SEEKING EMPLOYMENT , HE CONTINUES TO BE ENTITLED TO THOSE BENEFITS , TO BE PAID BY THE COMPETENT INSTITUTION OF THE MEMBER STATE IN WHICH HE WAS LAST EMPLOYED , FOR A PERIOD OF THREE MONTHS . AT THE END OF THAT PERIOD OF THREE MONTHS , THE UNEMPLOYED PERSON MUST RETURN TO THAT STATE IF HE IS TO CONTINUE TO BE ENTITLED TO THE BENEFITS .
7 ARTICLE 71 ( 1 ) PROVIDES FOR AN EXCEPTION TO THAT RULE IN THE CASE OF ' ' AN UNEMPLOYED PERSON WHO , DURING HIS LAST EMPLOYMENT , WAS RESIDING IN THE TERRITORY OF A MEMBER STATE OTHER THAN THE COMPETENT STATE ' ' . IN SUCH A CASE , THE PERSON CONCERNED MAY MAKE HIMSELF AVAILABLE FOR WORK TO THE EMPLOYMENT SERVICES OF THE MEMBER STATE IN WHICH HE RESIDES OR OF THE COMPETENT STATE , AS THE CASE MAY BE , AND THUS RECEIVE UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS AFTER THE EXPIRY OF THE THREE MONTH PERIOD . THAT EXCEPTION IS INTENDED TO PROTECT FRONTIER WORKERS AND OTHER PERSONS WHO RESIDE IN A MEMBER STATE OTHER THAN THAT IN WHICH THEY ARE EMPLOYED .
8 BY ' ' COMPETENT STATE ' ' , WITHIN THE MEANING OF THAT PROVISION , THE COMMUNITY LEGISLATURE IS REFERRING TO THE MEMBER STATE IN WHOSE TERRITORY THE COMPETENT INSTITUTION IS SITUATED , THAT IS , THE MEMBER STATE IN WHICH THE PERSON WAS LAST EMPLOYED . THE PROVISION THEREFORE CONCERNS ONLY WORKERS WHO WERE RESIDING IN A MEMBER STATE OTHER THAN THAT IN WHICH THEY WERE LAST EMPLOYED .
9 THE REPLY TO THE QUESTION SUBMITTED BY THE NATIONAL COURT MUST THEREFORE BE THAT ARTICLE 71 OF REGULATION NO 1408/71 DOES NOT APPLY TO AN UNEMPLOYED PERSON WHO , DURING HIS LAST EMPLOYMENT , WAS RESIDING IN THE MEMBER STATE IN WHICH HE WAS EMPLOYED .