Pensionsversicherungsanstalt v Peter Brey.

JurisdictionEuropean Union
Celex Number62012CJ0140
ECLIECLI:EU:C:2013:565
Date19 September 2013
CourtCourt of Justice (European Union)
Procedure TypeReference for a preliminary ruling
Docket NumberC‑140/12
62012CJ0140

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Third Chamber)

19 September 2013 ( *1 )

‛Freedom of movement for persons — Union Citizenship — Directive 2004/38/EC — Right of residence for more than three months — Article 7(1)(b) — Person no longer having worker status — Person in possession of a retirement pension — Having sufficient resources not to become a burden on the ‘social assistance system’ of the host Member State — Application for a special non-contributory cash benefit — Compensatory supplement intended to augment a retirement pension — Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 — Articles 3(2) and 70 — Competence of the Member State of residence — Conditions for granting — Legal right to reside on the national territory — Compliance with European Union law’

In Case C‑140/12,

REQUEST for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria), made by decision of 14 February 2012, received at the Court on 19 March 2012, in the proceedings

Pensionsversicherungsanstalt

v

Peter Brey,

THE COURT (Third Chamber),

composed of M. Ilešič, President of the Chamber, E. Jarašiūnas, A. Ó Caoimh (Rapporteur), C. Toader and C.G. Fernlund, Judges,

Advocate General: N. Wahl,

Registrar: A. Impellizzeri, Administrator,

having regard to the written procedure and further to the hearing on 7 March 2013,

after considering the observations submitted on behalf of:

Mr Brey, by C. Rappold, Rechtsanwalt,

the Austrian Government, by G. Hesse, acting as Agent,

the German Government, by T. Henze and J. Möller, acting as Agents,

Ireland, by E. Creedon, acting as Agent, assisted by A. Collins SC, and G. Gilmore BL,

the Greek Government, by M. Tassopoulou, acting as Agent,

the Netherlands Government, by M. Noort and C. Wissels, acting as Agents,

the Swedish Government, by A. Falk and H. Karlsson, acting as Agents,

the United Kingdom Government, by C. Murrell and J. Coppel, acting as Agents,

the European Commission, by V. Kreuschitz and C. Tufvesson, acting as Agents,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 29 May 2013,

gives the following

Judgment

1

This request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Article 7(1)(b) of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (OJ 2004 L 158, p. 77).

2

The request has been made in proceedings between Mr Brey and the Pensionsversicherungsanstalt (Pensions Insurance Institution) (Austria), concerning the latter’s refusal to grant him the compensatory supplement (Ausgleichzulage) provided for in Austrian legislation to augment his German retirement pension.

Legal context

European Union law

Directive 2004/38

3

Under recitals 10, 16, 20 and 21 in the preamble to Directive 2004/38:

‘(10)

Persons exercising their right of residence should not … become an unreasonable burden on the social assistance system of the host Member State during an initial period of residence. Therefore, the right of residence for Union citizens and their family members for periods in excess of three months should be subject to conditions.

(16)

As long as the beneficiaries of the right of residence do not become an unreasonable burden on the social assistance system of the host Member State they should not be expelled. Therefore, an expulsion measure should not be the automatic consequence of recourse to the social assistance system. The host Member State should examine whether it is a case of temporary difficulties and take into account the duration of residence, the personal circumstances and the amount of aid granted in order to consider whether the beneficiary has become an unreasonable burden on its social assistance system and to proceed to his expulsion. In no case should an expulsion measure be adopted against workers, self-employed persons or job-seekers as defined by the Court of Justice save on grounds of public policy or public security.

(20)

In accordance with the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of nationality, all Union citizens and their family members residing in a Member State on the basis of this Directive should enjoy, in that Member State, equal treatment with nationals in areas covered by the Treaty, subject to such specific provisions as are expressly provided for in the Treaty and secondary law.

(21)

However, it should be left to the host Member State to decide whether it will grant social assistance during the first three months of residence, or for a longer period in the case of job-seekers, to Union citizens other than those who are workers or self-employed persons or who retain that status or their family members, or maintenance assistance for studies, including vocational training, prior to acquisition of the right of permanent residence, to these same persons.’

4

Article 7(1)(b) of that directive, entitled ‘Right of residence for more than three months’, provides as follows:

‘1. All Union citizens shall have the right of residence on the territory of another Member State for a period of longer than three months if they:

(b)

have sufficient resources for themselves and their family members not to become a burden on the social assistance system of the host Member State during their period of residence and have comprehensive sickness insurance cover in the host Member State’.

5

Article 8 of Directive 2004/38, entitled ‘Administrative formalities for Union citizens’, provides:

‘1. Without prejudice to Article 5(5), for periods of residence longer than three months, the host Member State may require Union citizens to register with the relevant authorities.

2. The deadline for registration may not be less than three months from the date of arrival. A registration certificate shall be issued immediately, stating the name and address of the person registering and the date of the registration. Failure to comply with the registration requirement may render the person concerned liable to proportionate and non-discriminatory sanctions.

3. For the registration certificate to be issued, Member States may only require that

– …

Union citizens to whom point (b) of Article 7(1) applies present a valid identity card or passport and provide proof that they satisfy the conditions laid down therein,

– …

4. Member States may not lay down a fixed amount which they regard as “sufficient resources”, but they must take into account the personal situation of the person concerned. In all cases this amount shall not be higher than the threshold below which nationals of the host Member State become eligible for social assistance, or, where this criterion is not applicable, higher than the minimum social security pension paid by the host Member State.

…’

6

Article 14 of Directive 2004/38, entitled ‘Retention of the right of residence’, states:

‘…

2. Union citizens and their family members shall have the right of residence provided for in Articles 7, 12 and 13 as long as they meet the conditions set out therein.

In specific cases where there is a reasonable doubt as to whether a Union citizen or his/her family members satisfies the conditions set out in Articles 7, 12 and 13, Member States may verify if these conditions are fulfilled. This verification shall not be carried out systematically.

3. An expulsion measure shall not be the automatic consequence of a Union citizen’s or his or her family member’s recourse to the social assistance system of the host Member State.

…’

7

Under Article 24 of that directive, entitled ‘Equal treatment’:

‘1. Subject to such specific provisions as are expressly provided for in the Treaty and secondary law, all Union citizens residing on the basis of this Directive in the territory of the host Member State shall enjoy equal treatment with the nationals of that Member State within the scope of the Treaty. The benefit of this right shall be extended to family members who are not nationals of a Member State and who have the right of residence or permanent residence.

2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, the host Member State shall not be obliged to confer entitlement to social assistance during the first three months of residence or, where appropriate, the longer period provided for in Article 14(4)(b), nor shall it be obliged, prior to acquisition of the right of permanent residence, to grant maintenance aid for studies, including vocational training, consisting in student grants or student loans to persons other than workers, self-employed persons, persons who retain such status and members of their families.

…’

Regulation (EC) No 883/2004

8

As of 1 May 2010, Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems (OJ 2004 L 166, p. 1, and corrigendum, OJ 2004 L 200, p. 1) has replaced Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of the Council of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community, in the version amended and updated by Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of 2 December 1996 (OJ 1997 L 28, p. 1).

9

Article 1 of Regulation No...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
28 cases
  • Opinion of Advocate General Szpunar delivered on 15 November 2018.
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 15 November 2018
    ...(C‑127/08, EU:C:2008:449, paragraph 82); of 5 May 2011, McCarthy (C‑434/09, EU:C:2011:277, paragraph 28); and of 19 September 2013, Brey (C‑140/12, EU:C:2013:565, paragraph 22 Judgment of 20 December 2017, Gusa (C‑442/16, EU:C:2017:1004, paragraph 40 and the case-law cited). 23 The emphasis......
  • Jobcenter Berlin Neukölln v Nazifa Alimanovic and Others.
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 15 September 2015
    ...que cette personne occasionne une charge déraisonnable pour le système d’assistance sociale dans le cadre de son séjour (arrêt Brey, C‑140/12, EU:C:2013:565, points 64, 69 et 78), un tel examen individuel ne s’impose cependant pas dans un cas de figure tel que celui de l’affaire au 60 En ef......
  • Opinion of Advocate General Wahl delivered on 27 September 2018.
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 27 September 2018
    ...Xhymshiti, C‑247/09, EU:C:2010:698, paragraph 29. 14 See Article 1(1) of the Schengen Visa Code. 15 See judgment of 19 September 2013, Brey, C‑140/12, EU:C:2013:565, paragraph 49 and the case-law 16 See judgment of 21 December 2011, Ziolkowski and SzejaZiolkowski and SzejaZiolkowski and Sze......
  • Elisabeta Dano and Florin Dano v Jobcenter Leipzig.
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 20 May 2014
    ...11 ) Sentencias Jauch (EU:C:2001:139), apartado 21, y Skalka (EU:C:2004:269), apartado 19. ( 12 ) Véase, en este sentido, la sentencia Brey (C‑140/12, EU:C:2013:565), apartado ( 13 ) C‑140/12 (EU:C:2013:337), nota 8. El subrayado es mío. ( 14 ) Según las observaciones escritas del Gobierno ......
  • Get Started for Free
5 books & journal articles