Can the concept of a person ‘employed principally in the territory of the Member State in which he resides’ contained in Article 14(2)(a)(ii) [of Regulation (EEC) No. 1408/71, as amended] be interpreted in the same way as that which (concerning judicial cooperation in civil matters, jurisdiction and individual contracts of employment (Council Regulation (EC) No. 44/2001)) Article 19(2)(a) [of the latter Regulation] defines as the ‘place where the employee habitually carries out his work’, including in the aviation and airline crew sector (Council Regulation (EEC) No. 3922/91), as expressed in the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union referred to in the grounds?
DOI: 10.5553/EELC/187791072021006001048
European Employment Law Cases |
|
| Pending Cases | Case C-33/21, Social InsuranceIstituto nazionale per l’assicurazione contro gli infortuni sul lavoro (INAIL), Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS) – v – Ryanair DAC, reference lodged by the Corte suprema di cassazione on 18 January 2021 |
| Trefwoorden | Social Insurance |
| DOI | 10.5553/EELC/187791072021006001048 |
|
Toon PDF Toon volledige grootte Statistiek Citeerwijze |
| Dit artikel is keer geraadpleegd. |
| Dit artikel is 0 keer gedownload. |
Aanbevolen citeerwijze bij dit artikel
, "Case C-33/21, Social Insurance", European Employment Law Cases, 1, (2021):83-83
, "Case C-33/21, Social Insurance", European Employment Law Cases, 1, (2021):83-83