Keywords
Summary

Keywords

1. Social policy – Equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security – Material scope of Directive 79/7 – Annual adjustment of retirement pensions – Included

(Council Directive 79/7, Arts 3(1) and 4(1))

2. Social policy – Equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security – Directive 79/7 – National scheme for annual adjustment of retirement pensions

(Council Directive 79/7, Art 4(1))

Summary

1. Article 3(1) of Directive 79/7 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security must be interpreted as meaning that an annual adjustment scheme for retirement pensions comes within the ambit of that directive and is therefore subject to the prohibition of discrimination laid down in Article 4(1) of that directive.

Like the pension itself, its subsequent adjustment is designed to protect persons who have obtained the statutory retirement age against the risk of old age, by ensuring that they can have the necessary means in the light of, inter alia, their needs as retired persons.

(see paras 44, 53, operative part 1)

2. Article 4(1) of Directive 79/7 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security must be interpreted as precluding a national arrangement which leads to the exclusion, from an exceptional pension increase, provided for by a scheme for the annual adjustment of retirement pensions, of a significantly higher percentage of female pensioners than male pensioners.

A disparity is large enough to constitute a significant indication in that regard when 75% of male pensioners are liable to benefit from the exceptional increase in pensions whereas that is the case for only 43% of female pensioners. It is for the referring court to draw that conclusion in the light of the data submitted to it.

If, in the course of that examination, the referring court should conclude that a significantly higher percentage of female pensioners than male pensioners may in fact have suffered a disadvantage because of the exclusion of minimum pensions from such an exceptional increase, that disadvantage cannot be justified by the fact that women who have worked become entitled to a pension at an earlier age or that they receive their pension over a longer period, or because the compensatory supplement standard rate was also subject to an exceptional increase in respect of the same year.

(see paras 60, 62-63, 68,104, operative part 2-3)