Social Assistance of Union Citizens Flashcards
Crisitini
concerned a widow of a Italian widow working in France – French law provided that entitled families of over three children (rail cards) – only applied to French nationals.
ECJ: the widow and her children were eligible provided that her husband applied for them before his death
Inzirillo
Disability allowance under French law only available to French nationals- ECJ: disabled son of an Italian worker was also entitled because he was dependent of a worker
Martinez Sala
Principle: Court held that a union citizen who was lawfully resident in the host MS had a right under Article 18 TFEU not to suffer discrimination on the ground of nationality in all situations which fall within the scope of the treaty
Example of direct discrimination
Facts:Unemployed Spanish women in Germany had a right under article 18 – Germany cannot insist that she needs a German residence permit before granting her a child raising grant
Grezelczyk
A minimum subsistence allowance was available to Belgian national – in much more limited circumstance to nationals from other MS– ECJ: direct discrimination
D’ Hoop
Example of indirect discrimination
Belgian authorities required that secondary education must be completed in Belgium in order to receive a tide over allowance in order to pursue education in another member state.
Court held that she was not a worker and so she could not rely on article 45 TFEU or Regulation 492/2011 – however it allowed her to claim on the basis that she was a union citizen who had a right to freedom of movement. The requirement had placed her at a disadvantage simply because she had exercised that right to move freely in order to pursue education in another MS.
Collins
The Court of Justice held that the right to equal treatment enjoyed by Union citizens extended to benefits of a financial nature intended to facilitate access to employment.
The requirement of habitual residence under UK law indirectly discriminated against nationals of other MS who were seeking work in the UK as it was easier for UK nationals to satisfy. But in this case, it was objectively justifiable for a MS to grant jobseekers allowance only after it has established that a genuine link exists between the person seeking work and the employment market of that state
Dano and Dano
Principle: Article 20 read in conjunction with article 18 should be exercised subject to the conditions and limitations laid down by article 24 of directive 2004/38
Dano had been issued with a German residence card of unlimited duration. She has not worked and there was nothing to indicate that she was looking for work. She had been receiving benefits for her son but her application for jobseekers benefits was rejected (because she was not looking for employment). The court emphasised that article 7(1)(b) of directive 2004/38 seeks to prevent economically inactive Union citizens from using the host MS’s welfare system to fund their means of subsistence. Consequently, Dano could not invoke the principle of equal treatment with nations of the host member state
