Overview of recent cases before the Court of Justice of the European Union (January–June 2023)

IF 1.5 Q3 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION European Journal of Social Security Pub Date : 2023-09-14 DOI:10.1177/13882627231200355
Pauline Melin, Susanne Sivonen
{"title":"Overview of recent cases before the Court of Justice of the European Union (January–June 2023)","authors":"Pauline Melin, Susanne Sivonen","doi":"10.1177/13882627231200355","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this casenote, the judgments in DRV Intertrans and Verbraeken (Joined Cases C-410/21 and C-661/21) and Thermalhotel Fontana (Case C-411/22) are discussed. DRV Intertrans and Verbraeken concerned a case of alleged fraudulent A1 certificates for posted workers. The issue was that those A1 certificates were only provisionally, as opposed to definitively, withdrawn by the issuing institution. As a result, the referring court in DRV Intertrans and Verbraken asked the Court of Justice whether the courts of the Member State where the work was carried out could consider the provisional withdrawal of the A1 certificates by the issuing institution as rendering those A1 certificate non-binding. Alternatively, the referring court asked whether it could disregard those A1 certificates following the Altun jurisprudence of the Court of Justice. Thermalhotel Fontana involved isolation measures being imposed on frontier workers by their Member State of residence, making them unable to work. The specific legal issue at hand in Thermalhotel Fontana concerned the fact that the employer of those frontier workers was not able to get compensation from Austria, the Member State of establishment, for his employees due to the fact that the isolation measures were not taken by Austria but by the Member States of residence of the frontier workers. Considering that this case did not fall within the scope of Regulation 883/2004, the Court examined it under the principle of equal treatment of EU workers.","PeriodicalId":44670,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Security","volume":"66 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Social Security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13882627231200355","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this casenote, the judgments in DRV Intertrans and Verbraeken (Joined Cases C-410/21 and C-661/21) and Thermalhotel Fontana (Case C-411/22) are discussed. DRV Intertrans and Verbraeken concerned a case of alleged fraudulent A1 certificates for posted workers. The issue was that those A1 certificates were only provisionally, as opposed to definitively, withdrawn by the issuing institution. As a result, the referring court in DRV Intertrans and Verbraken asked the Court of Justice whether the courts of the Member State where the work was carried out could consider the provisional withdrawal of the A1 certificates by the issuing institution as rendering those A1 certificate non-binding. Alternatively, the referring court asked whether it could disregard those A1 certificates following the Altun jurisprudence of the Court of Justice. Thermalhotel Fontana involved isolation measures being imposed on frontier workers by their Member State of residence, making them unable to work. The specific legal issue at hand in Thermalhotel Fontana concerned the fact that the employer of those frontier workers was not able to get compensation from Austria, the Member State of establishment, for his employees due to the fact that the isolation measures were not taken by Austria but by the Member States of residence of the frontier workers. Considering that this case did not fall within the scope of Regulation 883/2004, the Court examined it under the principle of equal treatment of EU workers.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
欧盟法院近期审理案件概述(2023年1月至6月)
在本案例中,讨论了DRV Intertrans和Verbraeken(合并案例C-410/21和C-661/21)和Thermalhotel Fontana(案例C-411/22)的判决。DRV Intertrans和Verbraeken涉及一起外派工人涉嫌伪造A1证书的案件。问题是,这些A1级证书只是由发证机构暂时收回,而不是最终收回。因此,DRV Intertrans和Verbraken案的移交法院询问法院,开展工作的成员国的法院是否可以将颁发机构临时撤销A1证书视为使这些A1证书不具有约束力。或者,移交法院询问是否可以根据法院的Altun判例无视这些A1证书。丰塔纳热旅馆涉及到居住会员国对边境工人采取隔离措施,使他们无法工作。在Fontana Thermalhotel案中所涉及的具体法律问题是,由于隔离措施不是由奥地利采取的,而是由边境工人居住的成员国采取的,这些边境工人的雇主无法从其雇员所在国奥地利获得赔偿。考虑到此案不属于第883/2004号条例的范围,法院根据平等对待欧盟工人的原则进行了审查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Social Security
European Journal of Social Security PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
14.30%
发文量
28
期刊最新文献
Book Review: The Quantified Worker. Law and Technology in the Modern Workplace by Ifeoma Ajunwa An Effective protection against unemployment for self-employed and platform workers? The intriguing case of Denmark Exploring unemployment insurance for the self-employed and platform workers: How to navigate difficult waters? A comparative, conceptual and European perspective The rights to social security and social assistance in the European Social Charter: Towards a positive content…but what sort of content? Reaching the European 2030 poverty target: The imperative to balance the EU social agenda
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1