Case C-367/11

Déborah Prete

v

Office national de l’emploi

(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (Belgium))

‛Freedom of movement for persons — Article 39 EC — National of a Member State seeking employment in another Member State — Equal treatment — Tideover allowance for young persons seeking their first job — Grant subject to completion of at least six years’ studies in the host State’

Summary - Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber), 25 October 2012

1. Freedom of movement for persons — Workers — Equal treatment — Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of nationality — Article 39(2) EC — Application of that provision to persons seeking employment

   (Arts 12 EC and 39 EC)

2. Freedom of movement for persons — Workers — Equal treatment — Tideover allowance for young persons seeking their first job — Grant subject to completion of at least six years’ studies in the host Member State — Not permissible — Justification — None

   (Arts 18 EC and 39 EC)

1.  See the text of the decision.

   (see paras 21-28)

2.  Article 39 EC precludes a national provision which makes the right to a tideover allowance for the benefit of young people looking for their first job subject to the condition that the person concerned has completed at least six years’ studies in an educational establishment of the host Member State, insofar as that condition prevents other representative factors liable to establish the existence of a real link between the person claiming the allowance and the geographic labour market concerned being taken into account and accordingly goes beyond what is necessary to attain the aim pursued by that provision which is to ensure that such a link exists.

   Such legislation makes that right subject to a condition which is more likely to be met by nationals of that Member State, and therefore may well place nationals of other Member States, above all, at a disadvantage.

   That legislation can be justified only where, by imposing that condition, the national legislature wished to ensure that there was a real link between the applicant for that allowance and the geographic employment market concerned.

   That is not the case of legislation which prevents the taking into account, for the purpose of assessing the existence of such a link, of the fact that the applicant, in making use of the freedom of movement guaranteed to Union citizens by Article 18 EC, moved to the host Member State in order to establish her marital residence there following her marriage to a national of that State and that she had resided there for some time, and of the fact that she had been registered for some time as a job seeker with an employment service of that Member State, whilst at the same time actively looking for work there. Those facts are capable of demonstrating that such a link exists.

   (see paras 31, 33, 40, 46-48, 50, 52, operative part)

Case C-367/11

Déborah Prete

v

Office national de l’emploi

(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (Belgium))

‛Freedom of movement for persons — Article 39 EC — National of a Member State seeking employment in another Member State — Equal treatment — Tideover allowance for young persons seeking their first job — Grant subject to completion of at least six years’ studies in the host State’

Summary - Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber), 25 October 2012

1. Freedom of movement for persons — Workers — Equal treatment — Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of nationality — Article 39(2) EC — Application of that provision to persons seeking employment

   (Arts 12 EC and 39 EC)

2. Freedom of movement for persons — Workers — Equal treatment — Tideover allowance for young persons seeking their first job — Grant subject to completion of at least six years’ studies in the host Member State — Not permissible — Justification — None

   (Arts 18 EC and 39 EC)

1.  See the text of the decision.

   (see paras 21-28)

2.  Article 39 EC precludes a national provision which makes the right to a tideover allowance for the benefit of young people looking for their first job subject to the condition that the person concerned has completed at least six years’ studies in an educational establishment of the host Member State, insofar as that condition prevents other representative factors liable to establish the existence of a real link between the person claiming the allowance and the geographic labour market concerned being taken into account and accordingly goes beyond what is necessary to attain the aim pursued by that provision which is to ensure that such a link exists.

   Such legislation makes that right subject to a condition which is more likely to be met by nationals of that Member State, and therefore may well place nationals of other Member States, above all, at a disadvantage.

   That legislation can be justified only where, by imposing that condition, the national legislature wished to ensure that there was a real link between the applicant for that allowance and the geographic employment market concerned.

   That is not the case of legislation which prevents the taking into account, for the purpose of assessing the existence of such a link, of the fact that the applicant, in making use of the freedom of movement guaranteed to Union citizens by Article 18 EC, moved to the host Member State in order to establish her marital residence there following her marriage to a national of that State and that she had resided there for some time, and of the fact that she had been registered for some time as a job seeker with an employment service of that Member State, whilst at the same time actively looking for work there. Those facts are capable of demonstrating that such a link exists.

   (see paras 31, 33, 40, 46-48, 50, 52, operative part)