JUDGMENT OF 17. 12. 1975 — CASE 93/75 ADLERBLUM v CAISSE NATIONALE D'ASSURANCE VIEILLESSE DES TRAVAILLEURS SALARIÉS

In Case 93/75 Reference to the Court under Article 177 of the EEC Treaty by the Commission de Première Instance du Contentieux de la Sécurité Sociale et de la Mutualité Sociale Agricole, Paris, for a preliminary ruling in the action pending before that court between

THE COURT composed of: R. Lecourt, President, H. Kutscher, President of Chamber, A. M. Donner, J. Mertens de Wilmars, P. Pescatore, M. Sørensen and Lord Mackenzie Stuart, Judges, Advocate-General: A. Trabucchi Registrar: A. Van Houtte

gives the following

JUDGMENT

Facts

I — Facts and procedure

II — Written observations submitted to the Court

III — Oral procedure

Law

Costs

I —. Facts and procedure

II —. Written observations submitted to the Court

(a). the letter and the spirit of the German law of 29 June 1956 only envisage compensation for injury to life and limb, damage to health and loss of liberty on the part of beneficiaries for whom society assumes responsibility;

(b). compensation might as easily have taken the form of a lump sum payment or temporary assistance as that of a pension; the latter cannot be treated as a profit or income resulting in some way from a transfer of property or from an investment;

(c). pensions are closely related to social security benefits for public employees, which govern any increase in the former;

(d). although, as regards the pension in question, German subjects who adopted French nationality after 1945 are the responsibility of the Federal Republic of Germany, those who were naturalized before the war may benefit in France from assistance which is undeniably social in nature.

III —. Oral procedure

1. By decision of 2 July 1975, received at the Registry on 2 September 1975, the Commission de Première Instance du Contentieux de la Sécurité Sociale, Paris, referred to the Court under Article 177 of the EEC Treaty a question concerning the classification under French law of a decision of the authorities of the Federal Republic of Germany pursuant to the Federal Compensation Law (Bundesentschädigungsgesetz) of 29 June 1956.

2. The file shows that the plaintiff in the main action, who is in receipt of an old-age pension from the Caisse Nationale d'Assurance Vieillesse des Travailleurs Salariés, was refused an increase in pension in respect of a dependent spouse on the ground that his wife was receiving a pension from the Land of North Rhine-Westphalia under the aforementioned Law of the Federal Republic of Germany.

3. The plaintiff in the main action maintains that this pension, which is paid as compensation for injuries suffered by his wife as a result of persecution, is to be treated as a benefit granted by way of social assistance and that, as such, it should not be taken into account in the assessment of resources for the purpose of the grant of the increase in pension applied for.

4. It appears from the foregoing that since the question raised before the Commission de Première Instance du Contentieux de la Sécurité Sociale concerns the classification under French social security legislation of a benefit awarded under the German Compensation Law, it pertains to national law, alone and thus does not come within the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice.

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

6. As these proceedings are, in so far as the parties to the main action are concerned, in the nature of a step in the action pending before the Commission de Première Instance du Contentieux de la Sécurité Sociale, the decision as to costs is a matter for that tribunal.

On those grounds, THE COURT in answer to the question referred to it by the Commission de Première Instance du Contentieux de la Sécurité Sociale, Paris, by decision of 2 July 1975, hereby rules: