{"title":"Overview of recent cases before the Court of Justice of the European Union (March –September 2022)","authors":"Pauline Melin, Susanne Sivonen","doi":"10.1177/13882627221139501","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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).","PeriodicalId":44670,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Security","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","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/10.1177/13882627221139501","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 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).
在本案例说明中,将讨论法院的九项判决。讨论的前两项判决涉及家庭福利方面的平等待遇原则(S诉Familienkasse和Commission诉奥地利)。此外,报告的第一和第三项判决均与《公民身份指令》(第2004/38号指令)的解释有关(S v Familienkasse和VI)。关于社会保障的其他判决涉及养老金的计算以及根据第883/2004号条例适用于机组人员和机组人员的立法(INAIL和INPS)。剩下的四项判决分别是养老金方面基于性别的歧视案件(KM诉INSS和EB诉BVAEB)、年龄歧视案件(A诉HK Danmark和HK/Privat)以及临时代理员工和“正式”员工之间的歧视(Luso Temp)。