Reports of Cases

2000 I-08081

Subject-matter

Preliminary ruling ─ Tribunal d'Arrondissement ─ Interpretation of the principle of non-discrimination (Articles 6 and 48 of the EC Treaty and Council Regulations Nos 1612/68 and 1408/71) and of Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81 EC) in relation to Luxembourg national rules and conduct of the Luxembourg Union des Caisses de Maladie (Association of Sickness Funds) and the Entente des Hôpitaux Luxembourgeois (Luxembourg Hospitals Agreement), the result of which is that two different scales of charges are applied, depending on whether the persons concerned are affiliated to the Luxembourg Social Security Scheme or are not affiliated to that scheme (including staff affiliated to the Joint Sickness Insurance Scheme of the EC)

Systematic classification scheme

Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 6 -L1 : paragraphs 39, 50, 62
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 48 : paragraphs 43, 46
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 48 -P2 : paragraph 44
• Regulation 1612/68 : paragraphs 43, 46
• Regulation 1612/68 -A07P1 : paragraphs 44, 45
• Regulation 1408/71 -A02P1 : paragraph 41
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -152/73 -N11 : paragraph 57
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -36/74 : paragraph 50
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -43/75 : paragraph 50
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -152/82 -N09 : paragraph 43
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -389/87 -N11 : paragraph 42
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -389/87 -N12 : paragraph 43
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -179/90 -N11 : paragraph 39
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -310/91 -N20 : paragraph 42
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -310/91 -N22 : paragraph 43
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -379/92 -N18 : paragraph 39
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -415/93 : paragraph 50
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -151/94 -N14 : paragraph 57
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -176/96 -N37 : paragraph 39
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -411/98 -N49 : paragraph 41

Operative part

• Interprets : EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 6 -L1

Opinion

• EEC Treaty (Rome) - Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the EEC, Article 6 : point 88
  
• EEC Treaty (Rome) - Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the EEC, Article 13 -L2 : point 92
  
• EEC Treaty (Rome) - Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the EEC, Article 18 : point 88
  
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 5 : points 78, 106
  
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 6 : point 68
  
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 7 : points 62, 63 - 66, 69, 71, 79, 80
  
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 8 : point 68
  
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 8A : point 68
  
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 48 : points 52, 60, 63, 69, 79, 88
  
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 48 -P3 : point 97
  
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 51 : point 47
  
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 85 : points 106, 113, 130
  
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 85 -P1 : points 105, 107, 108, 116, 118, 119, 135
  
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 85 -P1LA : point 121
  
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 86 : point 113
  
• EC Treaty (Maastricht), Article 119 : point 79
  
• Staff Regulations of the EC -A28LA : point 88
  
• Regulation 1612/68 : points 63, 69
  
• Regulation 1612/68 -A07 : points 59, 79
  
• Regulation 1612/68 -A07P2 : points 55, 60, 80, 103
  
• Regulation 1408/71 -A01LA : point 44
  
• Regulation 1408/71 : points 44, 47, 48
  
• Regulation 1408/71 -A02P1 : point 49
  
• Regulation 1408/71 -A16P3 : point 50
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -27/74 -N08 : point 38
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -204/90 -N06 : point 38
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -22/80 -N05 : point 38
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -69/88 -N07 : point 38
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -13/63 -N04 : point 41
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -398/92 -N17 : point 41
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -57/96 -N45 : points 41, 42
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -57/96 -N46 : point 42
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -419/92 -N07 : point 42
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -35/97 -N37 : point 42
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -20/85 -N16 : point 42
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -85/96 -N31 : point 50
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -85/96 -N36 : point 44
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -310/91 : points 46, 88
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -310/91 -N18 : point 55
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -310/91 -N20 : point 51
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -310/91 -N44 : point 46
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -389/87 : point 88
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -389/87 -N15 : point 51
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -389/87 -N24 : point 67
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -315/94 -N18 : point 53
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -65/81 -N12 : point 55
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -249/83 -N20 : point 55
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -157/84 -N30 : point 55
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -57/96 -N39 : point 55
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -57/96 -N45 : point 96
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -111/91 : point 57
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -15/69 : point 58
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -44/72 : point 58
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -152/73 : point 58
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -32/75 : point 58
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -237/83 : point 58
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -137/84 : point 58
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -18/95 -N40 : point 60
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -305/87 -N13 : point 62
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -18/93 -N19 : point 62
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -43/95 -N10 : point 62
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -43/95 -N14 : point 65
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -24/86 : point 65
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -293/83 : point 65
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -152/82 -N09 : point 66
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -152/82 -N18 : point 66
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -152/82 -N19 : point 92
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -152/82 : points 67, 88
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -286/82 -N16 : point 69
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -265/95 -N30 : point 78
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -400/93 -N45 : point 79
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -158/96 -N18 : point 87
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -186/87 -N15 : point 94
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -45/93 : point 94
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -120/95 -N39 : point 98
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -18/95 -N57 : point 104
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -2/91 -N14 : point 106
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -70/95 -N41 : point 106
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -41/90 -N21 : point 109
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -159/91 -N17 : point 109
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -35/96 -N36 : point 111
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -159/91 -N18 : point 113
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -170/83 -N11 : point 114
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -209/78 -N88 : point 116
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -209/78 -N170 : point 123
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -185/91 : point 116
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -153/93 : point 116
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -85/96 -N62 : point 68
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -36/74 -N16 : point 74
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -13/76 -N17 : point 74
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -415/93 -N83 : point 74
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -96/94 : point 116
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -140/94 : point 116
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -45/85 -N41 : point 121
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -45/85 -N39 : point 119
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -243/83 -N44 : point 121
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -123/83 -N22 : point 123
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -219/95 -N19 : point 123
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -399/93 -N18 : point 123
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -73/74 -N24 : point 124
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -8/72 -N29 : point 124
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -42/84 -N22 : point 124
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -107/82 -N60 : point 129
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -22/71 -N16 : point 130
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -306/96 -N17 : point 130
  

Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

• 18/11/1998

Date of the Opinion

• 21/09/1999

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

03/10/2000

References

Publication in the Official Journal

Application: OJ C 20 from 23.01.1999, p.18

Judgment: OJ C 335 from 25.11.2000, p.18

Name of the parties

Ferlini

Notes on Academic Writings

1. Thill, Marc: Un nouvel aspect du système des soins de santé luxembourgeois sur la sellette. L'affaire Ferlini ou l'application des tarifs médicaux différenciés devant la Cour de Justice des Communautés européennes, Codex 2000 p.312-321 (FR)
2. Friden, Georges: Cour de justice des communautés européennes. Discrimination et "effet direct" dans le contexte de l'accès aux soins médicaux: l'arrêt Ferlini, Annales du droit luxembourgeois 2000 p.292-299 (FR)
3. Van der Steen, I.: Horizontale werking van de vier vrijheden en van het discriminatieverbod van artikel 12 EG, Nederlands tijdschrift voor Europees recht 2001 nº 4-9 (NL)
4. Sewandono, I.: S.E.W. ; Sociaal-economische wetgeving 2001 p.190-191 (NL)
5. Martin, Denis: European Journal of Migration and Law 2001 Vol.3 p.257-270 (EN)
6. Banu, Mihai: Libertatea de a presta servicii. Efect direct., Revista românǎ de drept al afacerilor 2009 nº 02 p.152-169 (RO)
7. Guyau, Jean-Marc: Un fonctionnaire européen peut-il être assujetti aux prélèvements sociaux sur ses revenus fonciers français ?, Revue de droit fiscal 2016 N°3 p.77-78 (FR)

Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Tribunal d'arrondissement de Luxembourg - Luxembourg

Subject-matter

• non-discrimination
  
• - Non-discrimination on grounds of nationality
  
• Freedom of movement for workers
  
• Competition
  
• - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices
  
• Social security
  

Provisions of national law referred to

Règlement grand-ducal du 31 décembre 1974, fixant le montant des forfaits d'accouchement, tel que modifié, fixant le montant des forfaits d'accouchement, tel que modifié Loi du 29/08/1976 portant organisation et planification hospitalières, portant organisation et planification hospitalières, art. 12

Provisions of international law referred to

Information not available

Procedure and result

• Reference for a preliminary ruling
  

Formation of the Court

Cour plénière (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Ragnemalm

Advocate General

Cosmas

Language(s) of the Case

• French
  

Language(s) of the Opinion

• Greek