This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62015CN0569
Case C-569/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 5 November 2015 — X, Other party: Staatssecretaris van Financiën
Case C-569/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 5 November 2015 — X, Other party: Staatssecretaris van Financiën
Case C-569/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 5 November 2015 — X, Other party: Staatssecretaris van Financiën
OJ C 38, 1.2.2016, p. 25–26
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
1.2.2016 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 38/25 |
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 5 November 2015 — X, Other party: Staatssecretaris van Financiën
(Case C-569/15)
(2016/C 038/37)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Hoge Raad der Nederlanden
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: X
Other party: Staatssecretaris van Financiën
Questions referred
1. |
Must Title II of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 (1) be interpreted as meaning that a worker residing in the Netherlands who normally works in the Netherlands and who takes unpaid leave for three months is deemed to continue to be (also) employed in the Netherlands during that period if (i) the employment relationship continues during that period and (ii) for purposes of the application of the Dutch Werkloosheidswet (Law on unemployment) that period is considered to be a period of employment? |
2. |
|
2. |
|
(1) 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 (OJ 1971 L 149, p. 2).