Facts

The age at which Czech citizens become eligible for state retirement benefits differs for men and women and, for women, on the number of children they have raised. This difference is not in breach of Directive 79/7  on  the  progressive  implementation  of  the  principle  of  equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security, because Article  7(1)  of  that  Directive  allows  Member  States  to  exclude  from its  scope  (i)  “the  determination  of  pensionable  age  for  the  purposes of granting old-age and retirement pensions” and (ii) “advantages in respect  of  old-age  pension  schemes  granted  to  persons  who  have raised children”.
Ms Soukupová was a farmer. Having raised two children, she became eligible for state retirement benefits at age 57 and 4 months. In 2006, by which time she had reached the age of 59, she applied for benefits under the Czech support scheme for early retirement. This scheme is basically  the  transposition  of  Regulation  (EC)  1257/1000  on  support for rural development. Article 10 of this Regulation provides: “Support for  early  retirement  from  farming  shall  contribute  to  the  following objectives:  to  provide  an  income  for  elderly  farmers  who  decide  to stop farming, to encourage the replacement of such elderly farmers by  farmers  able  to  improve,  where  necessary,  the  economic  viability of  the  remaining  agricultural  holdings,  to  reassign  agricultural  land to non-agricultural uses where it cannot be farmed under satisfactory conditions  of  economic  viability”.  Article  11  sets  out  the  conditions under which a farmer who stops farming is eligible for early retirement benefits. One of these conditions is that the farmer is not less than 55 years old “but not yet of normal retirement age”.
Ms Soukupová’s application for early retirement benefits was turned down  because  the  Czech  law  implementing  Regulation  1257/99 required applicants to have reached the age of 55 but not yet the age for entitlement to a state pension. Given that Ms Soukupová was already in receipt of a state pension at the time she filed her application, she was ineligible under Czech law.

National proceedings

Ms  Soukupová  challenged  the  rejection  of  her  application  for  early retirement benefits, arguing that the requirement under Czech law that an applicant be below the age for entitlement to a state pension was (i) in conflict with the requirement under Regulation 1257/1999 that an applicant be “not yet of normal retirement age” and (ii) discriminatory on the basis of gender, given that, under Czech law, women who have raised more children enjoy a shorter period in which to apply for early retirement from farming that that granted to men or women who have raised fewer children.
The  court  of  first  instance  turned  down  Ms  Soukupová’s  claim.  On appeal,  this  judgment  was  overturned.  The  government  (Ministry  of Agriculture) appealed to the Supreme Administrative Court. It referred three questions to the ECJ.

ECJ’s findings

1.  With  its  first  two  questions,  the  referring  court asked,  in  essence,  whether  it  is  compatible  with  EU  law for  “normal  retirement  age”  in  Regulation  1257/1999  to  be determined  differently  depending  on  gender  and,  in  the  case of  female  applicants,  on  the  number  of  children  raised  (§  22). 
2.  Early retirement support under Regulation 1257/1999 acts as an economic incentive which seeks to encourage elderly farmers to stop farming, earlier than they would do under normal circumstances and, thus, to facilitate structural change in the agricultural sector. It is an instrument of the Common Agricultural Policy and not a social security benefit falling within the scope of Directive 97/7. Therefore, Member States may not rely on the difference in treatment that Article 7(1) of that Directive authorises them to retain when defining retirement age in the field of social security (§ 23-26).
3.  In implementing Regulation 1257/19999, the Member States must respect the principle of equal treatment and non-discrimination enshrined  in  Articles  20,  21  and  23  of  the  Charter  of  Fundamental Rights of the EU (§ 27-28).
4.  According  to  settled  case-law,  those  principles  require that  comparable  situations  must  not  be  treated  differently  and  that different  situations  must  not  be  treated  in  the  same  way  unless such  treatment  is  objectively  justified.  It  is  clear  that  elderly  female farmers  and  elderly  male  farmers  are  in  comparable  situations, in  the  light  of  the  purpose  of  Regulation  1257/1999.  In  those circumstances,  it  would  be  contrary  to  EU  law  and  the  general principles  of  equal  treatment  and  non-discrimination  for  those situations be treated differently, without objective justification (§29-33). 
5.  Contrary  to  the  submissions  of  the  Czech  and  Polish governments, the difference in treatment at issue cannot be justified (§ 34). 
3.  Where discrimination contrary to EU law has been established, observance of the principle of equality can be ensured only by granting to persons within the disadvantaged category the same advantages as those within the favoured category (see ECJ case C-18/95 Terhoeve and C-399/09 Landtová) (§ 35).

Ruling

It  is  incompatible  with  EU  law  and  the  general  principles  of  equal treatment  and  non-discrimination  for  “normal  retirement  age”  in Regulation 1257/1999 to be determined differently depending on gender and, in the case of female applicants, on the number of children raised.