ECJ 1. Social security for migrant workers – worker – concept – definition vis-a-vis legislation – effect – purpose
(regulation no 1408/71 of the council, annex I, part I, paragraph 1)
2. Social security for migrant workers – worker – concept – person no longer paying contributions but entitled to benefits by virtue of contributions paid – inclusion
(regulations nos 1408/71 and 574/72 of the council)
3. Social security for migrant workers – legislation of member states within meaning of article 8 of regulation no 574/72 – concept (regulation no 574/72 of the council, art. 8) 4. Social security for migrant workers – claims, declarations or appeals submitted in another member state – admissibility – determination by institution or court of the competent member state (regulation no 1408/71 of the council, art. 86)
5. Social security of migrants workers – benefits – rules against overlapping – maternity benefit – article 8 of regulation no 574/72 – scope (regulation no 574/72 of the council, art. 8)
1. The provision in paragraph (1) of part I (united kingdom) of annex v to regulation no 1408/71, far from restricting the definition of the term ‘ ‘ worker ‘ ‘ as it emerges from article 1 (a) of the regulation, is solely concerned to clarify the scope of subparagraph (ii) of that paragraph vis-a-vis British legislation.
2. A person who is entitled under the legislation of a member state to benefits covered by regulation no 1408/71 by virtue of contributions previously paid compulsorily does not lose his status as a ‘ ‘ worker ‘ ‘ within the meaning of regulations nos 1408/71 and 574/72 by reason only of the fact that at the time when the contingency occurred he was no longer paying contributions and was not bound to do so.
3. The phrase ‘ ‘ legislations of two or more member states ‘ ‘, which occurs in article 8 of regulation no 574/72, must be understood as also including the provisions of community regulations.
4. Article 86 of regulation no 1408/71 must be interpreted as meaning that where a claim, declaration or appeal is submitted to an authority, institution or court of a member state other than that under the legislation of which the benefit must be awarded, that authority, institution or court has no power to determine the admissibility of the claim, declaration or appeal in question. That power belongs exclusively to the authority, institution or court of the member state under the legislation of which the benefit must be awarded and to which the claim, declaration or appeal must in all circumstances be forwarded.
5. Article 8 of regulation no 574/72 applies only to the extent to which a claim by the person concerned may in fact be satisfied by the application of the legislation of two or more member states and only in regard to the period for which the claimant may claim benefits under the legislation specified by that article.
On the other hand that provision does not preclude a person who has exhausted the maximum entitlement awarded by the state of the confinement from benefiting for an additional period from benefits awarded by other legislation to which she has been subject and which, for reasons of the welfare of the mother and child, allows a longer period of leave from work. Indeed, such a result could not be regarded as coming within the category of ‘ ‘ unjustified overlapping ‘ ‘ which the provision in question seeks to prevent.
Citations:
C-143/79, R-143/79, [1980] EUECJ R-143/79
Links:
European, Benefits
Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132913