C-45/72

Avis juridique important | 61972J0045 Judgment of the Court of 13 December 1972. - Giuseppe Merola v Nationaal Pensioenfonds voor Mijnwerkers. - Reference for a preliminary ruling: Arbeidsrechtbank Hasselt - Belgium. - Case 45-72. European Court reports 1972 Page 01255 Danish special edition Page 00319 Greek special edition Page 00309 Portuguese special edition Page 00439 Summary Parties Subject of the case Grounds Operative part Keywords ++++ SOCIAL SECURITY FOR MIGRANT WORKERS - COMMUNITY LAW - IMPLEMENTATION BY THE MEMBER STATES - COMMUNICATION OF INFORMATION TO EACH OTHER - RULES GOVERNING LANGUAGES ( REGULATION NO 3, ARTICLE 45 ) Summary ARTICLE 45 ( 4 ) OF REGULATION NO 3 OF THE COUNCIL CONCERNING SOCIAL SECURITY FOR MIGRANT WORKERS ( JO OF 16 . 12 . 1958, P . 561 ) DRAWS NO DISTINCTION ACCORDING TO THE NATURE, ADMINISTRATIVE OR JUDICIAL, OF THE INSTITUTIONS OR AUTHORITIES REQUIRED TO RECEIVE THE DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THAT PROVISION . THIS PROVISION REFERS TO ALL NATIONAL COURTS HAVING JURISDICTION IN SOCIAL SECURITY MATTERS . Parties IN CASE 45/72 REFERENCE TO THE COURT UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY BY THE ARBEIDSRECHTBANK FOR THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HASSELT ( BELGIUM ) FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING IN THE ACTION PENDING BEFORE THAT COURT BETWEEN GIUSEPPE MEROLA, RESIDING AT MACERATA, CAMPANIA ( ITALY ), AND NATIONAAL PENSIOENFONDS VOOR MIJNWERKERS, BRUSSELS, Subject of the case ON THE INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 45 OF REGULATION NO 3 OF THE COUNCIL CONCERNING SOCIAL SECURITY FOR MIGRANT WORKERS ( JO OF 16 . 12 . 1958, P . 561 ), Grounds BY A JUDGMENT OF 7 JULY 1972 WHICH WAS RECEIVED AT THE COURT REGISTRY ON 10 JULY 1972 THE ARBEIDSRECHTBANK FOR THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HASSELT ( BELGIUM ) SUBMITTED TO THE COURT, UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY, A QUESTION ON THE INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 45 ( 4 ) OF REGULATION NO 3 OF THE COUNCIL CONCERNING SOCIAL SECURITY FOR MIGRANT WORKERS ( JO OF 16 . 12 . 1958, P . 561 ). 2 IN THIS QUESTION THE COURT IS REQUESTED TO RULE WHETHER, " SINCE LABOUR COURTS AND TRIBUNALS INDISPUTABLY FORM PART OF THE JUDICIARY, SUPERVISING THE ADMINISTRATION WITHOUT DEALING WITH QUESTIONS OF ACTIVE ADMINISTRATION AND SINCE THEY DO NOT FORM PART OF THE EXECUTIVE, UNLIKE THE FORMER ADMINISTRATIVE COURTS HAVING JURISDICTION IN SOCIAL SECURITY MATTERS AND THE RAAD VAN STATE, LABOUR COURTS MAY STILL BE CONSIDERED AS " AN INSTITUTION CHARGED WITH THE ADMINISTRATION OF SOCIAL SECURITY " WITH ALL THE CONSEQUENCES FOLLOWING THEREFROM WITH REGARD TO THE USE OF LANGUAGES IN APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED TO BELGIAN LABOUR COURTS BY MIGRANT WORKERS ". 3 IT IS CLEAR FROM THE FILE THAT THE QUESTION RELATES TO THE JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF 5 JULY 1967 ( TERESA PACE ( NEE GUERRA ) V INSTITUT NATIONAL D' ASSURANCE MALADIE-INVALIDITE, CASE 6/67 ( 1967 ) ECR 219 ) WHICH GAVE A RULING UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE TREATY ON A REQUEST FOR AN INTERPRETATION BY THE BELGIAN RAAD VAN STATE ( CONSEIL D' ETAT ) AS WELL AS THE JUDGMENT GIVEN IN THE MAIN ACTION BY THAT COURT IN THE SAME CASE ON 11 OCTOBER 1968 . 4 THE ABOVEMENTIONED JUDGMENT OF THE COURT RULED THAT " THE COURTS OF A MEMBER STATE HAVING JURISDICTION IN SOCIAL SECURITY MATTERS ARE INCLUDED AMONGST THE AUTHORITIES WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 45 OF REGULATION NO 3 " UNDER WHICH PROVISION " THE INSTITUTIONS AND AUTHORITIES OF ONE MEMBER STATE SHALL NOT REJECT CLAIMS, OR OTHER DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED TO THEM, ON THE GROUNDS THAT THEY ARE WRITTEN IN AN OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OTHER THAN THAT OF ANOTHER MEMBER STATE ". 5 THE WORDING OF THE QUESTION IS TO BE EXPLAINED BY THE FACT THAT, BEFORE THIS JUDGMENT, SOCIAL SECURITY PROCEEDINGS IN BELGIUM PASSED FROM THE JURISDICTION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURTS AND OF THE RAAD VAN STATE, DESCRIBED AS " AGENCIES OF THE EXECUTIVE " BY THE ARBEIDSRECHTBANK, HASSELT, TO LABOUR COURTS AND TRIBUNALS WHICH ARE CONSIDERED AS COURTS PROPERLY SO-CALLED . 6 CONSEQUENTLY IT APPEARS THAT THE QUESTION IS WHETHER ARTICLE 45 OF REGULATION NO 3 ALSO COVERS NATIONAL COURTS OTHER THAN ADMINISTRATIVE COURTS . 7 ARTICLE 45 ( 4 ) OF REGULATION NO 3 DRAWS NO DISTINCTION ACCORDING TO THE NATURE, ADMINISTRATIVE OR JUDICIAL, OF THE INSTITUTIONS OR AUTHORITIES REQUIRED TO RECEIVE THE DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THAT PROVISION . 8 FURTHERMORE, ARTICLE 84 ( 4 ) OF REGULATION NO 1408/71 OF THE COUNCIL OF 14 JUNE 1971 ( OJ, SPECIAL EDITION, 1971 II, P . 416 ), WHICH REPLACED ARTICLE 45 ( 4 ) OF REGULATION NO 3 AS FROM 1 OCTOBER 1972, EXPRESSLY MENTIONS " TRIBUNALS " TOGETHER WITH " AUTHORITIES " AND " INSTITUTIONS ". 9 IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES THE REPLY TO BE GIVEN TO THE ARBEIDSRECHTBANK, HASSELT, MUST BE THAT ARTICLE 45 ( 4 ) OF REGULATION NO 3 REFERS TO ALL NATIONAL COURTS HAVING JURISDICTION IN SOCIAL SECURITY MATTERS . 10 THE COSTS INCURRED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE ITALIAN REPUBLIC AND THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, WHICH SUBMITTED OBSERVATIONS TO THE COURT, ARE NOT RECOVERABLE . AS THE PROCEEDINGS ARE, IN SO FAR AS THE PARTIES TO THE MAIN ACTION ARE CONCERNED, IN THE NATURE OF A STEP IN THE ACTION PENDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL DU TRAVAIL, HASSELT, THE DECISION ON COSTS IS A MATTER FOR THAT COURT . Operative part THE COURT IN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION SUBMITTED TO IT BY THE ARBEIDSRECHTBANK FOR THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HASSELT, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE JUDGMENT GIVEN BY THAT COURT ON 7 JULY 1972, HEREBY RULES : ARTICLE 45 ( 4 ) OF REGULATION NO 3 OF THE COUNCIL ON SOCIAL SECURITY FOR MIGRANT WORKERS ( JO OF 16 . 12 . 1958, P . 561 ) REFERS TO ALL NATIONAL COURTS HAVING JURISDICTION IN SOCIAL SECURITY MATTERS .