C-68/74

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 29 JANUARY 1975 1

Mr Angelo Alaimo v Préfet du Rhône

(preliminary ruling requested by the Tribunal administratif Lyon)

Case 68/74

Summary

Freedom of movement — Workers — Nationals of a Member State — Employment in the territory of another Member State — Children — Education — Admission under the same conditions as the nationals of the host State — Scope (Regulation No 1612/68 of the Council, Article 12, first paragraph)

on the interpretation of Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community (OJ, Special Edition 1968 (II), p. 475),

1 — Language of the Case: French.

JUDGMENT OF 29. 1. 1975 — CASE 68/74

THE COURT

composed of: R. Lecourt, President, J. Mertens de Wilmars and Lord Mackenzie Stuart, Presidents of Chambers, A. M. Donner (Rapporteur), R. Monaco, P. Pescatore, H. Kutscher, M. Sørensen and A. O Keeffe, Judges,

Advocate-General: J.-P. Warner Registrar: A. Van Houtte

I — Facts and written pro­ Rhône as being ultra vires. He maintains cedure that this decision is contrary to Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council of 15 October 1968 on Nuziata Alaimo, daughter of Angelo freedom of movement for workers Alaimo, of Italian nationality and working in France, was in receipt of a within the Community OJ Special State grant when she was a pupil at the Edition 1968 (II), p. 475). The Préfet du College d'Enseignement Technique at Rhône submitted observations seeking Villeurbanne. She could not remain a the dismissal of the application on the pupil of this school since she had not grounds that when pupils of foreign been accepted into the second year. She nationality attend an establishment for now attends the Ecole Delegue where technical education they can obtain she can claim a grant only from the either a State grant or an educational department and not a State grant. Mr grant made available by the foreign workers' welfare service from the funds Alaimo applied for a grant from the department on 7 February 1972 to the for welfare work for immigrants and préfet du Rhône who, by letter dated 11 that the Conseil Général which decided

February 1972, notified Mr Alaimo of not to give educational grants to pupils the rejection of his application for a of foreign nationality is the sole arbiter grant on the ground that 'The Conseil in determining the rules for allocating General du Rhône, because of the large educational grants out of the budget of number of requests for grants which it the department.

Justice of the EEC, written observations 2. The Préfet du Rhône observes that were submitted by Mr Alaimo, the Préfet he maintains what he says in his du Rhône, the Government of the Italian statement of defence submitted to the Republic and the Commission of the Tribunal Administratif, Lyon. He European Communities. observes further that it was only as from After hearing the report of the the 1973-1974 school year that State Judge-Rapporteur and the views of the educational grants were extended to Advocate-General, the Court decided to foreign pupils resident in France and open the oral procedure without a enrolled in general secondary education­ preparatory inquiry. al establishments and at the same time the Conseil Général du Rhône decided on 17 December 1973 that foreign children fulfilling the same conditions II — Observations submit­ could likwise claim grants from the ted under Article 20 of department. the Statute of the Court 3. The Italian Government observes of Justice of the Euro­ that the interpretation of Article 12 of pean Economic Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 with Community which the present case is concerned has been settled by the Court in its judgment 1. Mr Alaimo claims that in France the of 3 July 1974 in Case 9/74 Donato inadmissibility of children of foreign Casagrande v Landeshauptstadt nationals to educational establishments München [1974] ECR 773. In that under the same conditions of enrolment judgment the Court ruled that Article 12 as French children must be 'in of the aforementioned regulation refers accordance with the basic principles of not only to rules relating to admission education and human rights applied in but also to general measures intended to French territory'. It must be assumed facilitate educational attendance. In view

of that decision it would be superfluous Commission refers to the uniform to pursue this question further. case-law of the Court in the judgment of 15 October 1969 in Case 15/69, It is obvious that the provision of the aforementioned article includes the Württembergische Milchverwertung- financial conditions of admission, which Südmilch-AG v Salvatore Ugliola, Rec. 1969, p. 363, and the judgment of embrace both the possible exemption 13 December 1972 in Case 44/72, from payment of school fees and the Pieters Marsman v M. Rosskamp, Rec grant of financial aid. The Community rules on freedom of movement for 1972, p. 1243. According to those workers seek to achieve substantial decisions 'The Community rules relating to matters of social security are based on equality in all sectors, including the the principle that the law of each educational conditions for children, Member State must ensure that nationals between national workers and nationals of other Member States employed within of Member Countries. Equality of financial aid for admission and its territory receive all the benefits which assistance for educational courses it grants to its own nationals.' It follows constitutes a decisive and main factor of moreover from the judgment of 11 April 1973 in Case 76/72 Michel S. v. Ponds the rule in the aforementioned Article 12. National de Reclassement Social des 4. The Commission observes that the Handicapés [1973] ECR 457 that Article interpretation of Article 12 of Regulation 12 of Regulation No 1612/68 guarantees No 1612/68 of the Council raises two not only admission to courses. In Case questions: 9/74 abovementioned the Court reaffirmed this interpretation and ruled (a) Does Article 12 contain a prohibition on discrimination? that the wording of the provision contained in this article refers not only (b) Must the scope of this prohibition, to rules relating to admission but also to which the wording of Article 12 general measures intended to facilitate limits to the admission to courses, be educational attendance. In view of this understood in a wide or narrow interpretation by the Court there seems sense? no doubt that the expression used in The preliminary ruling sought in the Article 12 of Regulation No 1612/68 present case is whether the words 'shall must be understood in a broad sense be admitted.. . under the same involving equality of treatment as conditions as the nationals of that State' regards financial conditions and in should be limited to the conditions of particular the award of educational enrolment in the courses or whether the grants provided for in the legal system of provision guarantees likewise equality as the host country to facilitare attendance regards all the rights arising from at courses.

3 Since the above-mentioned Article 12 lays down that 'The children of a national of a Member State who is or has been employed in the territory of another Member State shall be admitted to that State's general educational, apprenticeship and vocational training courses under the same conditions as the nationals of that State, if such children are residing in its territory', the question is asked whether such equality of treatment is limited to the conditions of enrolment in courses or extends to all the rights arising from admission to such educational courses.

4 Regulation No 1612/68, according to the fifth recital of its preamble, was adopted in particular on the ground that 'the right of freedom of movement, in order that it may be exercised, by objective standards, in freedom and dignity, requires ... that obstacles to the mobility of workers shall be eliminated, in particular as regards the worker's right to be joined by his family and the conditions for the integration of that family into the host country'.

5 It follows from the judgment of the Court of 3 July 1974 in Case 9/74, Donato Casagrande v Landeshauptstadt München [1974] ECR 773 that such integration presupposes that, in the case of the child of a foreign worker who wishes to be admitted to an educational course, that child may take advantage

JUDGMENT OF 29. 1. 1975 — CASE 68/74

of benefits provided by the laws of the host country relating to educational grants, under the same conditions as nationals who are in a similar position.

6 In that case it was therefore ruled that 'Article 12 refers not only to rules relating to admission, but also to the general measures intended to facilitate educational attendance'.

THE COURT

in answer to the question referred to it by the Tribunal Administratif, Lyon, by judgment dated 8 September 1974, hereby rules:

Article 12 of Regulation No 1612/68 must be interpreted as ensuring for

ALAIMO v PREFET DU RHONE

the children referred to an equal position with regard to all the rights arising from admission to educational courses.

Lecourt Mertens de Wilmars Mackenzie Stuart Donner Monaco

My Lords, administratif de Lyon has already been settled by the Court's judgment in Case In this Case I am able to deliver my 9/74, Casagrande v Landesbauptstadt opinion at once and in the language of München ([1974] ECR 773) and I see no the Case. It will be very brief as it seems reason to suggest that your Lordships to me sufficient to say that, as both the should depart from anything in that Commission and the Italian Republic judgment. On the contrary I still hold have pointed out, the question raised by the view which I expressed to you at the order for reference of the Tribunal that time.

Adapting the operative part of that judgment to the wording of the question put by the Tribunal de Lyon, I am of the opinion that you should rule that, in providing that the children of a national of a Member State who is or has been employed in the territory of another Member State shall be admitted to that State's educational courses 'under the same conditions as the nationals' of that State, Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council refers not only to the conditions for admission to courses but also to the whole of the rights flowing from such admission.

1 — Translated from the French.