Case C-571/10

Servet Kamberaj

v

Istituto per l’Edilizia Sociale della Provincia autonoma di Bolzano (IPES) and Others

(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Bolzano)

‛Area of Freedom, Justice and Security — Article 34 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Directive 2003/109/EC — Status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents — Right to equal treatment with regard to social security, social assistance and social protection — Derogation from the principle of equal treatment for social assistance and social protection measures — Exclusion of ‘core benefits’ from the scope of that derogation — National legislation providing for housing benefit for low income tenants — Amount of funds for third-country nationals determined on the basis of a different weighted average — Rejection of an application for housing benefit owing to the exhaustion of the funds for third-country nationals’

Summary of the Judgment

1. EU law — Fundamental rights — Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms — Conflict between the Convention and a rule of national law — Obligation on the national judge to apply directly the provisions of that convention — None

   (Art. 6(3) TEU)

2. Border controls, asylum and immigration — Immigration policy — Status of third country nationals who are long-term residents — Right to equal treatment with regard to social security, social assistance and social protection

   (Council Directive 2003/109, Art. 11(1)(d) and (4))

1.  The reference made by Article 6(3) TEU to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms does not require the national court, in case of conflict between a provision of national law and that convention, to apply the provisions of that convention directly, disapplying the provision of domestic law incompatible with the convention.

   Admittedly, that provision of the EU Treaty reflects the principle according to which fundamental rights form an integral part of the general principles of law the observance of which the Court ensures. However, that provision does not govern the relationship between the European Convention on Human Rights and the legal systems of the Member States and nor does it lay down the consequences to be drawn by a national court in case of conflict between the rights guaranteed by that convention and a provision of national law.

   (see paras 61-63, operative part 2)

2.  Article 11(1)(d) of Directive 2003/109 concerning the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents must be interpreted as precluding a national or regional law which provides, with regard to the grant of housing benefit, for different treatment for third-country nationals enjoying the status of long-term resident conferred pursuant to the provisions of that directive compared to that accorded to nationals residing in the same province or region when the funds for the benefit are allocated, in so far as such a benefit falls within one of the three categories referred to in that provision and Article 11(4) of that directive does not apply.

   Since the integration of third-country nationals who are long-term residents in the Member States and the right of those nationals to equal treatment in the sectors listed in Article 11(1) of Directive 2003/109 is the general rule, the derogation provided for in Article 11(4) thereof must be interpreted strictly. A public authority, at national, regional or local level, can rely on that derogation only if the bodies in the Member State concerned responsible for the implementation of Directive 2003/109 have stated clearly that they intended to rely on that derogation.

   The meaning and scope of the concept of ‘core benefits’ in Article 11(4) of Directive 2003/109 must be sought taking into account the context of that article and the objective pursued by that directive, namely the integration of third-country nationals who have resided legally and continuously in the Member States. That provision must be understood as allowing Member States to limit the equal treatment enjoyed by holders of the status conferred by that directive, with the exception of social assistance or social protection benefits granted by the public authorities, at national, regional or local level, which enable individuals to meet their basic needs.

   In so far as housing benefit serves the objective stated in Article 34 of the Charter on Fundamental Rights of the European Union, that is to say to ensure a decent existence for all those who lack sufficient resources, it cannot be considered, under EU law, as not being part of core benefits within the meaning of Article 11(4) of Directive 2003/109. It is for the referring court to reach the necessary findings, taking into consideration the objective of the benefit at issue, its amount, the conditions subject to which it is awarded and the place of that benefit in the national system of social assistance.

   (see paras 86, 87, 90-93, operative part 3)

Case C-571/10

Servet Kamberaj

v

Istituto per l’Edilizia Sociale della Provincia autonoma di Bolzano (IPES) and Others

(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Bolzano)

‛Area of Freedom, Justice and Security — Article 34 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Directive 2003/109/EC — Status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents — Right to equal treatment with regard to social security, social assistance and social protection — Derogation from the principle of equal treatment for social assistance and social protection measures — Exclusion of ‘core benefits’ from the scope of that derogation — National legislation providing for housing benefit for low income tenants — Amount of funds for third-country nationals determined on the basis of a different weighted average — Rejection of an application for housing benefit owing to the exhaustion of the funds for third-country nationals’

Summary of the Judgment

1. EU law — Fundamental rights — Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms — Conflict between the Convention and a rule of national law — Obligation on the national judge to apply directly the provisions of that convention — None

   (Art. 6(3) TEU)

2. Border controls, asylum and immigration — Immigration policy — Status of third country nationals who are long-term residents — Right to equal treatment with regard to social security, social assistance and social protection

   (Council Directive 2003/109, Art. 11(1)(d) and (4))

1.  The reference made by Article 6(3) TEU to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms does not require the national court, in case of conflict between a provision of national law and that convention, to apply the provisions of that convention directly, disapplying the provision of domestic law incompatible with the convention.

   Admittedly, that provision of the EU Treaty reflects the principle according to which fundamental rights form an integral part of the general principles of law the observance of which the Court ensures. However, that provision does not govern the relationship between the European Convention on Human Rights and the legal systems of the Member States and nor does it lay down the consequences to be drawn by a national court in case of conflict between the rights guaranteed by that convention and a provision of national law.

   (see paras 61-63, operative part 2)

2.  Article 11(1)(d) of Directive 2003/109 concerning the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents must be interpreted as precluding a national or regional law which provides, with regard to the grant of housing benefit, for different treatment for third-country nationals enjoying the status of long-term resident conferred pursuant to the provisions of that directive compared to that accorded to nationals residing in the same province or region when the funds for the benefit are allocated, in so far as such a benefit falls within one of the three categories referred to in that provision and Article 11(4) of that directive does not apply.

   Since the integration of third-country nationals who are long-term residents in the Member States and the right of those nationals to equal treatment in the sectors listed in Article 11(1) of Directive 2003/109 is the general rule, the derogation provided for in Article 11(4) thereof must be interpreted strictly. A public authority, at national, regional or local level, can rely on that derogation only if the bodies in the Member State concerned responsible for the implementation of Directive 2003/109 have stated clearly that they intended to rely on that derogation.

   The meaning and scope of the concept of ‘core benefits’ in Article 11(4) of Directive 2003/109 must be sought taking into account the context of that article and the objective pursued by that directive, namely the integration of third-country nationals who have resided legally and continuously in the Member States. That provision must be understood as allowing Member States to limit the equal treatment enjoyed by holders of the status conferred by that directive, with the exception of social assistance or social protection benefits granted by the public authorities, at national, regional or local level, which enable individuals to meet their basic needs.

   In so far as housing benefit serves the objective stated in Article 34 of the Charter on Fundamental Rights of the European Union, that is to say to ensure a decent existence for all those who lack sufficient resources, it cannot be considered, under EU law, as not being part of core benefits within the meaning of Article 11(4) of Directive 2003/109. It is for the referring court to reach the necessary findings, taking into consideration the objective of the benefit at issue, its amount, the conditions subject to which it is awarded and the place of that benefit in the national system of social assistance.

   (see paras 86, 87, 90-93, operative part 3)