04 Juin European Court of Justice – june 2024
Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 45 TFEU – Freedom of movement for workers – Equal treatment – Social advantages – Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 – Article 7(2) – Family allowance – Worker having custody of a child placed with that worker by a court order – Resident worker and non-resident worker – Difference in treatment – No justification.
ECJ, 16 May 2024, Case C 27/23, FV v Caisse pour l’avenir des enfants.
Link
Article 45 TFEU and Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on freedom of movement for workers within the Union
must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State under which a non-resident worker may not receive a family allowance associated with his or her employment in that Member State for a child placed with that worker by a court order and of whom he or she has custody, whereas a child placed in care by a court order and residing in that Member State is entitled to receive that allowance, which is paid to the natural or legal person who has custody of that child. The fact that the non-resident worker provides for the upkeep of the child placed with him or her can be taken into account in the context of the grant of a family allowance to such a worker in respect of a child placed in his or her household only if the applicable national legislation provides for such a condition to be attached to the grant of that allowance to a resident worker who has custody of a child placed in his or her household.
