ECJ 7 december 2017, case C-189/16 (Zaniewicz-Dybeck), Free movement, Social insurance

A minimum benefit as defined in Article 50 of Regulation No 1408/71 may not be calculated in accordance with Articles 46(2) and 47 of that Regulation, but benefits receive in other Member States may be taken into account in calculating the minimum benefit.

ECJ 13 September 2017, case C-570/15 (X), Free movement, Social insurance

A Dutch employee who resides in Belgium and performs only 6.5% of his hours worked in Belgium (and the rest in the Netherlands), cannot be regarded as ‘normally’ pursuing an activity in two or more Member States. The special rule in Article 14(2)(b)(i) of Regulation No 1408/71, stating that a person normally employed in the territory of two or more Member States shall be subject to the legislation of the Member State in whose territory he resides, does not apply in this case.

ECJ 13 September 2017, case C-570/15 (X), Free movement, Social insurance

A Dutch employee who resides in Belgium and performs only 6.5% of his hours worked in Belgium (and the rest in the Netherlands), cannot be regarded as ‘normally’ pursuing an activity in two or more Member States. The special rule in Article 14(2)(b)(i) of Regulation No 1408/71, stating that a person normally employed in the territory of two or more Member States shall be subject to the legislation of the Member State in whose territory he resides, does not apply in this case.

Case C-370/17. Social security

Is the effect of an E 101 certificate issued, in accordance with Article 11(1) and Article...

Case C-370/17. Social security

Is the effect of an E 101 certificate issued, in accordance with Article 11(1) and Article...

ECJ 13 July 2017, case C-89/16 (Szoja), Social security

Marginal activities should be disregarded for the purposes of determining which national social security legislation applies.

ECJ 18 July 2017, case C 566/15 (Erzberger), Free movement of workers

The exclusion of employees of a group, employed outside of Germany, from the right to vote and stand as candidates in elections of employee representatives on the supervisory board of the German parent company, is not contrary to the free movement of workers.

ECJ 13 July 2017, case C-89/16 (Szoja), Social security

Marginal activities should be disregarded for the purposes of determining which national social security legislation applies.

ECJ 18 July 2017, case C 566/15 (Erzberger), Free movement of workers

The exclusion of employees of a group, employed outside of Germany, from the right to vote and stand as candidates in elections of employee representatives on the supervisory board of the German parent company, is not contrary to the free movement of workers.

2017/17 No legal protection against termination for a pregnant employee who does not hold a valid work permit (FR)

A pregnant employee with no valid work permit in France does not benefit from protective legal provisions forbidding or restraining her termination.