8.5.2023   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 164/31


Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Bremen (Germany) lodged on 25 January 2023 — L v Familienkasse Sachsen der Bundesagentur für Arbeit

(Case C-36/23, Familienkasse Sachsen)

(2023/C 164/40)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Bremen

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: L

Defendant: Familienkasse Sachsen der Bundesagentur für Arbeit

Questions referred

Questions concerning the interpretation of the priority rules laid down in Article 68 of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004: (1)

1.

Does Article 68 of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 allow German child benefit to be partly recovered retrospectively on the ground of a priority entitlement in another Member State, even though no family benefit has been or is being assessed or paid for the child in the other Member State, with the result that the amount remaining to the beneficiary under German law effectively falls below the German child benefit?

2.

In the event that the first question is answered in the affirmative:

Does the answer to the question as to the grounds on which benefits are payable by more than one Member State within the meaning of Article 68 of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004, or the bases on which the entitlements to be coordinated arise, depend on the conditions of entitlement under the national rules, or on the circumstances on account of which the persons concerned are subject to the legislation of the relevant Member States in accordance with Articles 11 to 16 of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004?

3.

In the event that the decisive criterion is the circumstances on account of which the persons concerned are subject to the legislation of the relevant Member States in accordance with Articles 11 to 16 of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004:

Is Article 68 in conjunction with Article 1(a) and (b) and Article 11(3)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 to be interpreted as meaning that an activity as an employed person or an activity as a self-employed person in another Member State, or an equivalent situation treated as such an activity for the purposes of social insurance legislation, is to be assumed to be present where the social insurance fund in the other Member State certifies that the person concerned is insured ‘as a farmer’ and the competent family benefits institution in that State confirms the existence of an activity as an employed person, even though the person concerned claims that that insurance is dependent only on ownership of the farm, which is registered as agriculturally productive land but is not actually in use?


(1)  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).