Under German law, Mrs Khalil and her husband, Mrs Chaaban, Mr Osseili and Mr Nasser are
regarded as stateless persons.
Since those persons had the grant of child benefit discontinued under new German legislation
during the period from December 1993 to March 1994, they submitted in support of their actions
challenging the decisions depriving them of those advantages that they and/or their spouses had
to be regarded as stateless persons and, consequently, should enjoy family benefits in accordance
with Community law which would enable them to be treated in the same way as German
nationals and other nationals of the Member States of the European Union. According to them,
payment of those benefits should not have been made conditional on possession of a specific
residence document.
Mrs Addou (Case C-180/99) is an Algerian national whose husband, like her children, had
Moroccan nationality. He subsequently became a German national by naturalisation, after having
enjoyed the status of refugee within the meaning of the Geneva Convention. Mrs Addou and herhusband travelled in 1988 from Algeria and Morocco to Germany where they have since lived
continuously. They have been refused the right of asylum but, in February 1994, they received
a residence authorisation and, in May 1996, a residence permit.
Mrs Addou brought an application challenging the refusal of the Land Nordrhein-Westfalen to
pay her child-raising allowance. That application was granted by the appeal court which held that
the possession of a residence document was immaterial since, as a member of the family of a
recognised refugee, Mrs Addou had to be treated in the same way as German nationals and other
nationals of the Member States of the European Union, pursuant to Community law.
The persons concerned rely on the Community regulation on social security for migrant workers
and their families which includes in its scope of application workers who are stateless persons
or refugees residing within the territory of one of the Member States, as well as the members of
their families and their survivors. In respect of the term "refugee", the Community legislation
refers to the international Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (Geneva, 1951) and, in
respect of the term "stateless person", to the international Convention relating to the Status of
Stateless Persons (New York, 1954).
The Bundessozialgericht, as final court of appeal, referred a number of questions to the Court of
Justice of the European Communities on the validity and interpretation of that Community
regulation.
As regards validity, the Bundessozialgericht has doubts about the power of the Community
legislature to regulate the situation of stateless persons and refugees.
The Court of Justice pointed out that, in 1957, the original six Member States were all already
contracting parties to the Geneva Convention of 1951 (refugees) and the New York Convention
of 1954 (stateless persons).
The Court of Justice also pointed out that the ultimate objective of coordinating the national
social security schemes, which was already provided for in the EEC Treaty of 1957, is to ensure
as complete freedom of movement for workers as possible.
The Court of Justice found that the Council cannot be criticised for having included stateless
persons and refugees resident on the territory of the Member States, in order to take into account
the international obligations of those States, within the scope of the Community regulation on
social security for migrant workers and their families.
The German court also sought to ascertain whether workers who are refugees or stateless persons
residing in the territory of one of the Member States and members of their families may rely on
the rights conferred by that Community regulation where they have travelled to that Member
State directly from a non-member country and have not moved within the Community.
The Court of Justice pointed out that the objective of Community law in respect of migrant
workers is coordination of the social security schemes of the Member States and payment of
benefits under those coordinated schemes. The Community regulation on social security for
migrant workers and their families lays down a whole set of rules founded upon the prohibition
of discrimination on grounds of nationality or residence and upon the maintenance by a worker
of his rights acquired by virtue of one or more social security schemes which are or have been
applicable to him.
The Court referred to its earlier case-law according to which those rules do not apply to situations
which have no factor linking them to Community law. The advantages derived from the status
of migrant worker within the European Union cannot be granted to stateless persons or refugees
residing in a Member State where they are in a situation which is confined in all respects within
that one Member State.
|
Available in English, French and German.
For the full text of the judgment, please consult our Internet page
For further information please contact Fionnuala Connolly:
Tel: (00 352) 4303 3355; Fax: (00 352) 4303 2731 |