SC: Menstrual Health is a Fundamental Right under Article 21; Orders Free Sanitary Pads in Schools  ||  Supreme Court: Industrial Court is the Proper Forum to Decide Issues Relating to Contract Labour  ||  Supreme Court: Only Civil Court of Original Jurisdiction Can Extend Arbitral Tribunal’s Mandate  ||  SC: Demolition of Private Property Must Rest on Clear Statutory Grounds and Due Consideration  ||  SC: After Complaint Was Withdrawn, BCI Disciplinary Committee Could Not Penalise Advocate  ||  MP HC: Decree Holder Cannot Defeat Compromise or Initiate Execution by Refusing Debtor’s Cheque  ||  MP HC: Spouse’s Income Cannot Be Clubbed With Public Servant’s for Disproportionate Assets Case  ||  Ker HC: Bar Association is Not Employer & Cannot Form Internal Complaints Committee under POSH Act  ||  SC: Ex-Contract Workers Must Be Preferred When Employers Replace Contract Labour With Regular Staff  ||  SC: Waqf Tribunals Cannot Hear Claims over Properties Not Listed or Registered under Waqf Act    

Vestische Arbeit Jobcenter Kreis Recklinghausen v. Jovanna García-Nieto and Others - (25 Feb 2016)

ECJ ruling to curb “welfare tourism”

Human Rights

The European Court of Justice confirmed that a Member State of the European Union may exclude nationals of other Member States from certain social benefits, such as jobseekers allowance, and children’s benefits during the first three months of residence.

In the instant case, a Spanish family had relocated to Germany in the hopes of finding employment. Finding only nominal work in the country, the family applied for subsistence benefits within three months of moving. Their application was refused for not meeting the minimum residency criteria and none in the family having the status of a worker or self-employed person, reliant almost entirely on the Employment Centre. Hearing the matter, a ‘Higher Social Court’ in Germany referred the matter to the European Court of Justice. Specifically, it raised questions about the principle of equal treatment under Article 4 of Regulation 883/2004 of the EU and exclusions under Article 70. The Court held that national legislation could exclude citizens of other Member States from deriving benefit to certain ‘special non-contributory cash benefits’. Qualifications to being able to receive such benefits, such as having the status of a worker or self-employed person, could not be prevented from being imposed.

Tags : WELFARE TOURISM   EU   RESIDENCY   BENFITS  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved