Documents Sivonen, Susanne 3 results

"The concept of ‘working time' for a period of stand-by time according to a stand-by system applicable to firefighters was interpreted by the Court in MG (C-214/20). In the Y case (C-636/19), the Court interpreted the concept of ‘insured person' for the purpose of reimbursement of healthcare costs under Directive 2011/24. In the TS case (C-538/19), the Court dealt with another cross-border healthcare case. This time the question was whether a Member State can require an authorisation for cross-border healthcare to be subject to the submission of a medical report drawn up by a doctor from its national public health insurance system in light of Article 20 of Regulation 883/2004 and Article 56 TFEU. In ASGI and APN (C-462/20), the exclusion of third-country nationals from the eligibility to the Italian family card was under scrutiny. In SC (C-866/19), the Court clarified that the principle of aggregation applies to the calculation of the theoretical amount of benefit but not to the calculation of the actual amount of benefit under Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation 883/2004. In K (C-285/20), the Court held that being on sick leave and receiving sickness benefits can be considered as equivalent to the pursuit of an economic activity for the purpose of applying the rules on unemployment benefits for wholly unemployed frontier workers under Article 65(2) and (5) of Regulation 883/2004."

"In Bezirkshauptmannschaft Hartberg-Fürstenfeld (C-205/20), the Court of Justice was asked to clarify whether a provision under Directive 2014/67 on the proportionality of penalties in the context of posting of workers has direct effect. In CJ v TGSS (C-389/20), the Spanish social security legislation excluding domestic workers from unemployment benefits was under scrutiny in light of the principle of non-discrimination on grounds of sex enshrined in Directive 79/7. In HR Rail (C-485/20), the Court of Justice interpreted the obligation for employers to provide for ‘reasonable accommodation' for workers with disabilities, including trainees, under Article 5 of Directive 2000/78. In Koch Personaldienstleistungen GmbH (C-514/20), the Court determined whether for the purposes of calculating working time and overtime pay, account should be taken only of the hours actually worked or also of the hours from annual paid leave. Continuing on the importance of the right to annual leave, the Court ruled, in Staatssecretaris van Financiën (C-217/20), on the remuneration of annual leave in situations of permanent incapacity of a worker due to illness. In VB (C-262/20), the Court considered the compatibility of Bulgarian law on the duration of night work for civil servants such as firefighters with Directive 2003/88 and the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Finally, in MIUR et Ufficio Scolastico Regionale per la Campania (C-282/19), the Court assessed whether the systematic use of successive fixed-term contracts for Catholic education teachers in Italy could be justified by ‘objective reasons' within the meaning of Clause 5(1) of the framework agreement."

"In this case note, nine judgments of the Court will be discussed. The first two judgments discussed concern the principle of equal treatment in relation to family benefits (S v Familienkasse and Commission v Austria). Additionally, both the first and third judgments reported relate to the interpretation of the Citizenship Directive (Directive 2004/38) (S v Familienkasse and VI). The other judgments on social security deal with the calculation of old-age pension (CC) and the legislation applicable for flight and cabin crew (INAIL and INPS) under Regulation 883/2004. The four remaining judgments are cases of discrimination on grounds of sex in the context of pensions (KM v INSS and EB v BVAEB), on grounds of age (A v HK Danmark and HK/Privat) and between temporary agency workers and ‘regular' workers (Luso Temp)."