This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62014CA0072
Joined Cases C-72/14 and C-197/14: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 September 2015 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof te ’s-Hertogenbosch and the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — X v Inspecteur van Rijksbelastingdienst (C-72/14) and T. A. van Dijk v Staatssecretaris van Financiën (C-197/14) (References for a preliminary ruling — Migrant workers — Social security — Applicable legislation — Rhine boatmen — E 101 certificate — Probative value — Reference to the Court — Obligation to make a reference for a preliminary ruling)
Joined Cases C-72/14 and C-197/14: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 September 2015 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof te ’s-Hertogenbosch and the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — X v Inspecteur van Rijksbelastingdienst (C-72/14) and T. A. van Dijk v Staatssecretaris van Financiën (C-197/14) (References for a preliminary ruling — Migrant workers — Social security — Applicable legislation — Rhine boatmen — E 101 certificate — Probative value — Reference to the Court — Obligation to make a reference for a preliminary ruling)
Joined Cases C-72/14 and C-197/14: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 September 2015 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof te ’s-Hertogenbosch and the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — X v Inspecteur van Rijksbelastingdienst (C-72/14) and T. A. van Dijk v Staatssecretaris van Financiën (C-197/14) (References for a preliminary ruling — Migrant workers — Social security — Applicable legislation — Rhine boatmen — E 101 certificate — Probative value — Reference to the Court — Obligation to make a reference for a preliminary ruling)
IO C 363, 3.11.2015, p. 9–10
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
3.11.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 363/9 |
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 September 2015 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof te ’s-Hertogenbosch and the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — X v Inspecteur van Rijksbelastingdienst (C-72/14) and T. A. van Dijk v Staatssecretaris van Financiën (C-197/14)
(Joined Cases C-72/14 and C-197/14) (1)
((References for a preliminary ruling - Migrant workers - Social security - Applicable legislation - Rhine boatmen - E 101 certificate - Probative value - Reference to the Court - Obligation to make a reference for a preliminary ruling))
(2015/C 363/11)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring courts
Gerechtshof te ’s-Hertogenbosch and the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: X (C-72/14), T. A. van Dijk (C-197/14)
Defendants: Inspecteur van Rijksbelastingdienst (C-72/14), Staatssecretaris van Financiën (C-197/14)
Operative part of the judgment
|
1. |
Article 7(2)(a) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of the Council of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons and their families moving within the Community, and Articles 10c to 11a, 12a and 12b of Regulation (EEC) No 574/72 of the Council of 21 March 1972 fixing the procedure for implementing Regulation No 1408/71, as amended and updated by Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of 2 December 1996, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 647/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 April 2005, must be interpreted as meaning that a certificate issued by the competent institution of a Member State in the form of an E 101 certificate in order to certify that a worker is subject to the social security legislation of that Member State, when that worker comes within the scope of the Agreement of 13 February 1961 concerning the Social Security of Rhine Boatmen, signed at Geneva on 30 November 1979, is not binding on the institutions of other Member States. The fact that the issuing institution did not intend to issue a genuine E 101 certificate but used the standard form of that certificate for administrative reasons is irrelevant in that regard. |
|
2. |
The third paragraph of Article 267 TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that a national court or tribunal against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law, such as the referring court, is not required to make a reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union on the sole ground that a lower national court, in a case similar to the one before it and involving the same legal issue, has referred a question to the Court for a preliminary ruling; nor is it required to wait until an answer to that question has been given. |