GENERAL NOTICE

In January 2025, this online platform will be integrated into Boomportaal (www.boomportaal.nl), after which this platform will be discontinued. From that moment on, this URL will automatically redirect to Boomportaal.

DOI: 10.5553/EELC/187791072018003004041

European Employment Law CasesAccess_open

Pending cases

Case C-257/18, Social insurance

M. Güler – v – Raad van bestuur van het Uitvoeringsinstituut werknemersverzekeringen, reference lodged by the Centrale Raad van Beroep (Netherlands) on 13 April 2018

DOI
Show PDF Show fullscreen
Statistics Citation
This article has been viewed times.
This article been downloaded 0 times.
Suggested citation
, "Case C-257/18, Social insurance", European Employment Law Cases, 4, (2018):69-69

Dit artikel wordt geciteerd in

      1. Can a Turkish national who is duly registered as belonging to the labour force of a Member State, has obtained the nationality of that Member State without renouncing his Turkish nationality and subsequently voluntarily renounced the nationality of that Member State and thus Union citizenship rely on Article 6 of Decision 3/80 to avoid the residence requirement under the TW?

      2. If so, at what point must that Turkish national satisfy the requirement that he is not a Union citizen in order to derive rights from Article 6 of Decision 3/80: right from the time he leaves the host Member State or only later, when the benefit to be exported is payable in the foreign country?

      3. Is Article 6(1) of Decision 3/80 to be construed as meaning that a Turkish national who still held the nationality of a Member State at the time of remigration to Turkey but later voluntarily renounced that nationality, from that latter point onwards may not be denied the right to a special benefit not based on non-contributory payments designed to guarantee an income to the amount of the guaranteed minimum income in the Member State concerned, solely because he is resident in Turkey, even if, until the time of departure from the Member State concerned, he was not eligible for that special benefit since the award conditions had not then be satisfied?


Print this article