Jun
2
Marie-Nathalie D’Hoop [2002]
June 2, 2007 | Leave a Comment
In the D’Hoop case, the ECJ broadened its reasoning to migrant nationals of one Member State. Ms. D’Hoop a Belgian national had completed her baccalaureate in France before commencing university studies in Belgium. After she had completed her university studies she had applied for a “tide over allowance” (a social benefit available for students seeking their first employment). The allowance was refused by the Belgian national employment office under the Royal Decree of 25 November 1991, because Ms. D’Hoop had completed her secondary education in France. The tide over allowance targeted young graduates by giving them access to special employment programs.
Ms D’Hoop appealed against this decision before the Tribunal du travail de Liege, which subsequently stayed the proceedings and referred a question for preliminary ruling to the ECJ, asking:
“. . . whether Community law precludes a Member State from refusing to grant the tide over allowance to one of its nationals . . . on the sole ground that that student completed her secondary education in another Member State.”
The issue here was whether Ms. D’Hoop could be excluded from a benefit that was both available to Belgians having studied in Belgium and to foreigners under the same conditions.
This case gave the ECJ the opportunity to rule that Belgian legislation granting tide over allowances to Belgian nationals, who have completed their secondary education in Belgian establishments, contravenes articles 12 and 18(1) EC Treaty.
Text of the ECJ judgment
Text of the AG opinion