Interpretation of Competent State under Regulation 883/2004: Analysis of Konevod v. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2020] EWCA Civ 809
Introduction
The case of Konevod v. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions ([2020] EWCA Civ 809) presents a significant examination of the application of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems within the European Union. This appeal involves Mr. Konevod, who sought a UK non-contributory sickness benefit while residing in Cyprus. The central issue revolved around determining the competent Member State responsible for the payment of carer's allowance under the Regulation, especially in light of the Court of Justice of the European Communities’ (CJEU) earlier decision in Tolley v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Case C-430/15).
Summary of the Judgment
The England and Wales Court of Appeal analyzed whether the UK was the competent Member State for the payment of Mr. Konevod’s carer's allowance under Regulation 883/2004. The Upper Tribunal had previously held that Cyprus, not the UK, was the competent state. On appeal, the Court of Appeal upheld this decision, reaffirming that the competent Member State is determined by the state of residence under Title II of Regulation 883/2004. Consequently, Mr. Konevod was denied the UK carer's allowance, as Cyprus was identified as the competent Member State responsible for social security benefits.
Analysis
Precedents Cited
The judgment extensively referenced prior cases to underpin its reasoning:
- Tolley v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (C-430/15): Addressed the export of benefits under Regulation 1408/71, establishing key interpretative principles regarding competent states.
- Coppola v Insurance Officer (C-150/82): Interpreted the "place of last work" rule under Regulation 1408/71.
- Twomey v Chief Adjudication Officer (C-215/90): Explored the application of Regulation 1408/71 in cases of moving between Member States without subsequent employment.
- Pensionsversicherungsanstalt v CW (C-135/19): Clarified the principle of single applicable legislation under Regulation 883/2004.
These precedents collectively informed the court’s interpretation of the Regulation, emphasizing the shift from the earlier Regulation 1408/71 to the broader and more comprehensive Regulation 883/2004.
Legal Reasoning
The court's legal reasoning hinged on the principle of single applicable legislation as stipulated in Regulation 883/2004. Under Title II of the Regulation, the applicable legislation is determined primarily by the person's place of residence unless specific exceptions apply. Since Mr. Konevod was residing in Cyprus, Regulation 883/2004 identified Cyprus as the competent Member State for his carer's allowance claim.
The appellant argued that based on his past contributions and entitlements in the UK, he should still be considered an "insured person" under UK legislation, thereby making the UK the competent Member State. However, the court rejected this view, clarifying that the competent Member State is unequivocally the one with applicable legislation under Title II, which, in this case, was Cyprus.
Additionally, the court addressed the relationship between carer's allowance and attendance allowance, asserting that despite their interconnected nature in domestic law, they are distinct benefits governed by separate provisions within Regulation 883/2004. This separation means that the competent state for one does not influence the competent state for the other.
Impact
This judgment reinforces the efficacy of Regulation 883/2004 in coordinating social security systems across EU Member States by maintaining the clarity of the competent state based on the individual's current residence. It highlights the Regulation's emphasis on the principle of single applicable legislation, thereby reducing ambiguity in cross-border social security claims.
For future cases, this decision sets a clear precedent that residency is a critical factor in determining the competent Member State for social security benefits, overriding previous entitlements or contributions made in another Member State. It also delineates the boundaries between different types of benefits, ensuring that each is assessed based on its specific regulatory framework.
Complex Concepts Simplified
Regulation 883/2004
A European Union regulation that coordinates social security systems among Member States to ensure that individuals moving within the EU are not deprived of social security benefits and that benefits are not redundantly provided by multiple states.
Principle of Single Applicable Legislation
A fundamental principle within Regulation 883/2004 stating that at any given time, an individual is subject to only one Member State's social security legislation to avoid overlapping or conflicting benefits.
Competent Member State
The EU Member State whose social security legislation applies to an individual based on criteria such as residency, employment, or other specific conditions outlined in Regulation 883/2004.
Insured Person
Defined under Regulation 883/2004 as a person who meets the conditions required under a Member State's social security legislation, entitling them to benefits from that state.
Conclusion
The Court of Appeal's decision in Konevod v. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions underscores the paramount importance of Regulation 883/2004 in determining the competent Member State for social security benefits based on residency. By reaffirming that Cyprus is the competent state for Mr. Konevod's carer's allowance, the judgment reinforces the Regulation's role in harmonizing social security protections across the EU. The clear delineation between different types of benefits and their respective competent states ensures consistent and fair application of social security laws, providing clarity for individuals navigating cross-border social security claims.
Comments