JUDGMENT OF 3. 12. 1974 — CASE 40/74 BELGIUM, COSTERS, VOUNCKX v BERUFSGENOSSENSCHAFT FEINMECHANIK

Reference to the Court under Article 177 of the EEC Treaty by the Bundessozialgericht, for a preliminary ruling in the action pending before that court between

THE COURT composed of: C. Ó Dálaigh and Lord Mackenzie Stuart, Presidents of Chambers, A. M. Donner (Rapporteur), R. Monaco, J. Mertens de Wilmars, P. Pescatore, H. Kutscher and M. Sørensen, Judges, Advocate-General: G. Reischl, Registrar: A. Van Houtte,

gives the following

JUDGMENT

Issues of fact and of law

I — Facts and procedure

II — Observations submitted under Article 20 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Economic Community

Law

Costs

I —. Facts and procedure

II —. Observations submitted under Article 20 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Economic Community

1. The defendant in the national proceedings refers to the German text of Article 47, first sentence, of Regulation No 3, according to which any claim, declaration or appeal which should have been submitted, in order to comply with the legislation of one Member State, within a specified period to an authority, institution or other agency of that State shall be admissible if it is submitted within the same period to an authority, institution or other corresponding agency (bei der entsprechenden Stelle) of another Member State.

2. The Commission agrees with the Bundessozialgericht's analysis according to which Article 47 of Regulation No 3 applies in this case. It is the purpose of this provision to facilitate procedures in matters of social security. It is already difficult to determine jurisdiction in this field at national level. At international level the determination of the agency having jurisdiction gives rise to even greater difficulties. This is why the Commission considers that Article 47 of Regulation No 3 must be interpreted in the widest possible sense. Nevertheless it does not agree that the liaison departments referred to in Article 3 of Regulation No 4 amount to agencies to which under Article 47 an appeal could be presented having the effect of preserving the time limits, whatever might be the functions of these departments. The text of Article 47 of Regulation No 3, which expressly states that the effect of preserving the time limit only occurs where the appeal was submitted within the specified period to a corresponding agency (German text), runs counter to the interpretation advocated by the plaintiffs in the national proceedings. It also follows from the wording of Article 47, second sentence, of Regulation No 3 that, for its first sentence to apply, the functions of the institutions must at least correspond. This provision draws a clear distinction between agencies to which the matter is submitted under the first sentence and the competent authorities to which the first-mentioned agencies may address themselves for the purpose of forwarding to them appeals which they have received. The liaison departments mentioned in Article 3 of Regulation No 4 are not, therefore, always at the same time the corresponding agency to which a matter may be submitted so as to preserve the time limit under Article 47.

1. By order of 15 May 1974, lodged at the Registry on 11 June 1974, the Bundessozialgericht has referred to the Court, under Article 177 of the EEC Treaty, a question for a preliminary ruling on the interpretation of Article 47 of Regulation No 3 of the Council of 25 September 1958 concerning social security for migrant workers (OJ 1958, p. 561).

2. It appears from the request that the question, referred within the framework of an appeal on a point of law before the Bundessozialgericht, is concerned with the admissibility of an appeal made to the Landessozialgericht of North Rhine-Westphalia, by one of the plaintiffs in the national proceedings, against a judgment of the Sozialgericht of Cologne.

3. When this court rejected the appeal as being out of time, the plaintiffs in the national proceedings appealed on a point of law to the Bundessozialgericht, basing themselves on the argument that the Kingdom of Belgium and the Federal Republic of Germany had established liaison departments for the purpose of alleviating the difficulties in carrying into effect the Conventions in the field of social security.

4. Article 47 of Regulation No 3 reads as follows: Any claim, declaration or appeal which should have been submitted, in order to comply with the legislation of one Member State, within a specified period to an authority, institution or other agency of that State shall be admissible if it is submitted within the same period to an authority, institution, or other corresponding agency of another Member State. In such case the authority, institution, or agency receiving the claim, declaration or appeal shall forward it without delay to the competent authority, institution or agency of the former State, either directly or through the competent authority of the Member States concerned.

5. Article 47 of Regulation No 3 has the purpose of reducing the difficulties of a legal and administrative kind which might arise in applying this Regulation, having regard to the possible state of uncertainty of a worker residing in another Member State as regards which authorities, institutions, or other agencies to address in order to assert his rights.

6. Having regard to the difference in social security systems and systems for legal protection of the rights of the parties as between the different Member States, the provision of Article 47 — which allows them to turn to an authority, institution or other corresponding agency of another Member State — cannot be interpreted as obliging them to observe distinctions between respective competences.

7. However, Article 47 only refers to the case where the worker lives in a Member State other than that whose law has to be applied.

8. The costs incurred by the Commission of the European Communities, which has submitted observations to the Court, are not recoverable.

On those grounds, THE COURT in answer to the question referred to it by the Bundessozialgericht by order of that court dated 15 May 1974, hereby rules:

(a) A liaison department such as that referred to in Article 3 of Regulation No 4 may be considered as another corresponding agency within the meaning of Article 47 of Regulation No 3, even where one is dealing with the submission of an appeal.

(b) Subject to exceptions, this Article cannot apply where the party involved is resident, or is for the purpose of his claim, declaration or appeal represented by a representative, e.g. a lawyer, established in the Member State whose law must be applied.