OPINION OF MR CAPOTORTI — JOINED CASES 173 AND 174/78 VILLANO v NORDWESTLICHE EISEN- UND STAHL-BERUFSGENOSSENSCHAFT

Mr President,

Members of the Court,

1. In the two joined cases to which this opinion relates the Court of Justice is asked to settle a problem of the interpretation of Article 30 (1) of Regulation No 3 of 1958 on social security for migrant workers and of the corresponding Article 61 (5) of Regulation No 1408/71 of 1971.

2. The Bundessozialgericht took cognizance of the two cases and referred to the Court of Justice, by orders which are separate but identical as to their wording and content, the following question:

3. I have already recalled that, for the purposes of Article 30 (1) of Regulation No 3 and of Article 61 (5) of Regulation No 1408/71 the competent national institution which receives a claim for insurance benefits in connexion with an accident at work must also take into consideration, in order to assess the degree of invalidity, accidents which have occurred previously under the legislation of another Member State as if they had occurred under the legislation which it administers; provided, that is, that the legislation of the State to which the institution in question belongs lays down that previous accidents which have occurred within the ambit of that legislation must be taken into account.

4. In order fully to clarify the scope of those provisions whose interpretation has been requested by the court making the reference I think we must ascertain the actual task assigned to the insurance institution which is competent in the last instance by the words take into consideration [accidents at work which have occurred previously] in order to assess the aggregate degree of incapacity, which appear in both of the provisions in question.

5. It seems to me that an entirely different problem arises in establishing which insurance institution is liable to pay benefits where two or more accidents at work occur in different Member States and in fixing any criteria for apportioning that liability where it must be borne jointly by the institutions of two or more Member States.

6. Once it has been decided that under the provisions of Article 30 (1) of Regulation No 3 and of the corresponding Article 61 (5) of Regulation No 1408/71 the national insurance institutions are not obliged to have regard to subsequent accidents and diseases it remains to be established whether that obligation follows from any other Community provision.

7. In conclusion I accordingly suggest that the Court of Justice should reply to the single question submitted by the Bundessozialgericht of the Federal Republic by two orders of 27 June 1978 with the following ruling:

1 Translated from the Italian.