Luxembourg Financial Aid for Higher Studies and Children of Frontier Workers: Evolution and Challenges in Light of the Case-Law of the Court of Justice
SILGA, Janine ; University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Law, Economics and Finance (FDEF) > Law Research Unit
Co-auteurs externes :
yes
Langue du document :
Anglais
Titre :
Luxembourg Financial Aid for Higher Studies and Children of Frontier Workers: Evolution and Challenges in Light of the Case-Law of the Court of Justice
1 See the Opinion of the Council of State of 21 Mar. 2000 on draft legislation no. 4562, leading to the adoption of the Loi du 22 juin 2000 concernant l’aide financière de l’Etat pour études supérieures.
2 Loi du 12 aout 2003 portant création de l’Université du Luxembourg, Mémorial A no. 149 of 6 Oct. 2003, at 2290.
3 For more details on the portability of financial aid for higher education in the EU, read: M. Jacobs & L. Van den Broeck, A quelles conditions les étudiants peuvent-ils étudier à l’étranger avec une bourse d’étude de l’Etat Membre de résidence?, 194 Journal de droit européen 289–294 (2012); A.-C. Simon, La portabilitité des bourses d’études dans l’Union européenne, Eur. J. Consumer L. 66–86 (2007–2008); H. Skovgaard-Petersen, There and Back Again: Portability of Students Loans, Grands and Fee Support in a Free Movement Perspective, 36(6) Eur. L. Rev. 783–804 (2013).
4 Art. 1(f) of the Regulation no. 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems defines a frontier worker as ‘any person pursuing an activity as an employed or self-employed person in a Member State and who resides in another Member State to which he returns as a rule daily or at least once a week’. Regulation (EC) no. 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 Apr. 2004 on the coordination of social security systems, OJEU L 166/1 of 30 Apr. 2004.
6 Loi du 8 décembre 1977 concernant l’aide financière de l’Etat pour études supérieures, Mémorial A no. 73 of 10 Dec. 1977, at 2102.
7 Art. 165(1) TFEU clearly states that Member States are responsible ‘…[f]or the content of teaching and the organization of education systems and their cultural and linguistic diversity.’
8 See recital 21 as well as Art. 24(2) of Directive 2004/38 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States, OJEU L 158/77 of 30 Apr. 2004.
9 Judgment of 20 June 2013, Elodie Giersch and Others v. État du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg, C-20/12, EU:C:2013:411.
10 For more details on this case-law, see developments below under point 3.
11 Judgment of 14 Dec. 2016, Maria do Céu Bragança Linares Verruga and Others v. Ministre de l’Enseignement supérieur et de la recherche, C-238/15, EU:C:2016:949.
12 Judgment of 15 Dec., Noémie Depesme and Others v. Ministre de l’Enseignement supérieur et de la recherche, joined cases C-401/15 to C-403/15, EU:C:2016:955.
13 Loi du 22 juin 2000 concernant l’aide financière de l’Etat pour études supérieures, Mémorial A no. 49 of 28 June 2000, at 1106.
14 Art. 1(1) of Loi du 22 juin 2000 concernant l’aide financière de l’Etat pour études supérieures.
15 Art. 4(1) of Loi du 22 juin 2000 concernant l’aide financière de l’Etat pour études supérieures.
16 Arts 4(1) and 8(2) of Loi du 22 juin 2000 concernant l’aide financière de l’Etat pour études supérieures, now Art. 6 of Loi du 24 juillet 2014 concernant l’aide financière de l’Etat pour études supérieures.
17 Arts 1(1) and 4(4) of Loi du 22 juin 2000 concernant l’aide financière de l’Etat pour études supérieures.
18 Administrative Court, decision of 12 July 2004, application no. 17568, confirmed by the Higher Administrative Court, decision of 25 Jan. 2005, application no. 18539C.
19 In Giersch, the Luxembourg Administrative Court argued that the notion of domicile and residence ‘cover the same factual concept, that is to say the place where the person concerned actually, lawfully and continuously lives’, para. 29.
20 Loi du 4 avril 2005 modifiant la loi du 22 juin 2000 concernant l’aide financière de l’Etat pour études supérieures, Mémorial A, no. 50 of 20 Apr. 2005. Specific arrangements were adopted for Luxembourg nationals residing abroad who were adversely affected by this reform and wished to maintain a domicile in Luxembourg. See J. Gerkrath, Des aides financières discriminatoires? – L’arrêt de la Cour de Justice de l’Union européenne dans l’affaire Elodie Giersch et autres contre Etat du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg Politik 7–10, 8 (Feb. 2014). Read also the Report of the Committee for Higher Education and Research of 16.02.2005, on the draft legislation no. 5407 for the amendment of the Loi du 22 juin 2000 concernant l’aide financière de l’Etat pour études supérieures, at 3.
21 Loi du 26 juillet 2010 amending among others – and for the second time – the loi du 22 juin concernant l’aide financière de l’Etat pour études supérieures, Mémorial A no. 118 of 27 July 2010, at 2039.
22 See draft legislation no. 6148 of 18 June 2010 amending for the second time the Loi du 22 juin 2000 concernant l’aide financière de l’Etat pour études supérieures, at 2. This approach has been criticized by the Council of State on the grounds that it did not favour social equality since the criteria for attributing financial aid did not include parents’ income but only the income of the student. In its view, the depiction of a student that would be entirely independent from the family household was akin to a legal fiction. Opinion of the Council of State on draft legislation no. 6148, at 2. Read also J. Gerkrath, supra n. 20, at 7.
23 Art. 1(4°) of Loi du 26 juillet 2010.
24 Art. 1(1°) of Loi du 26 juillet 2010.
25 For more details on this point, read draft legislation no. 6148 of 18 June 2010 amending – for the second time – the Loi du 22 juin 2000 concernant l’aide financière de l’Etat pour études supérieures, at 2–3.
26 Currently Art. 271(2) of the Social Security Code.
27 See point 3.1. below.
28 Loi du 19 juillet 2013 amending – for the third time – the Loi du 22 juin 2000 concernant l’aide financière de l’Etat pour études supérieures, Mémorial A no. 132 of 25 July 2013, at 2724, republished in Mémorial A no. 168 of 13 Sept. 2013, at 3214.
29 Draft legislation no.6670 of 20 Mar. 2014, at 3.
30 Loi du 24 juillet 2014 concernant l’aide financière de l’Etat pour études supérieures, Mémorial A no. 139 of 31 July 2014, at 2188.
31 Draft legislation no.6670 of 20 Mar. 2014, at 2.
32 Art. 4 of Loi du 24 juillet 2014 concernant l’aide financière de l’Etat pour études supérieures.
33 Art. 6 of Loi du 24 juillet 2014 concernant l’aide financière de l’Etat pour études supérieures.
34 Loi du 23 juillet 2016 amending the Loi du 24 juillet 2014 concernant l’aide financière de l’Etat pour études supérieures, Mémorial A no. 143 of 29 July 2016, at 2430.
35 Art. 3(1°) of the Loi du 23 juillet 2016.
36 Art. 2(1°) of the Loi du 23 juillet 2016.
37 Art. 8 of the Loi du 23 juillet 2016.
38 Giersch, para. 15.
39 Regulation (EU) no. 492/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 Apr. 2011 on freedom of movement for workers within the Union, OJEU L 141/1 of 27 May 2011.
40 Ibid., para. 35.
41 Judgment of the Court of 21 June 1988, Lair v. Universität Hannover, 39/86, ECLI:EU:C:1988:322, Judgment of the Court of 26 Feb. 1992, Bernini v. Minister van Onderwijs en Wetenschappen, C-3/90, ECLI:EU:C:1992:89, Judgment of the Court of 8 June 1999, Meeusen v. Hoofddirectie van de Informatie Beheer Groep, C-337/97, ECLI:EU:C:1999:284 and Judgment of 14 June 2012, European Commission v. Kingdom of the Netherlands, C-542/09, EU:C:2012:346.
42 Giersch, paras 38–39.
43 Ibid., para. 41.
44 Ibid., paras 42–43.
45 Ibid., para. 44.
46 Ibid., para. 46.
47 Ibid., paras 47–56.
48 Ibid., para. 80.
49 Giersch, para. 79.
50 In Bragança Linares Verruga, the Court explained that when mentioning this article, it was simply ‘drawing inspiration, by analogy…’ from it. Following the Opinion of Advocate General Wathelet, the Court then confirmed that this analogy was irrelevant for imposing such a condition on frontier workers, insofar as they were workers, thus enjoying de lege equal treatment. Bragança Linares Verruga, paras 65–66.
51 Administrative Court: decisions of 14 Oct. 2013 (applications nos.: 27576a, 27679a, 27689a and 28442a).
52 Administrative Court: decisions of 2 Dec. 2013 (applications nos.: 28182, 28366, 29345 and 32742).
53 Ibid., para. 51.
54 Judgment of the Court of 18 July 2007, Wendy Geven v. Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, C-213/05, EU: C:2007:438.
55 Bragança Linares Verruga, para. 52.
56 Ibid., para. 69.
57 Ibid., paras 29–30.
58 Ibid., para. 68.
59 For more a more detailed critical analysis of this point, see A. Turmo, Accès des frontaliers aux aides aux études luxembourgeoises – Des precisions insatisfaisantes sur l’arrêt Giersch, (4) Revue des Affaires Européennes 701–712, read especially: 710–712 (2016).
60 Administrative Court: decisions of 5 Jan. 2015 (applications nos.: 33791, 33928, 33961 and 34436) and decisions of 18 May 2015 (applications nos.: 34717 and 34790).
61 Higher Administrative Court: decisions of 22 July 2015 (applications nos.: 35820C, 35848C and 35851C).
62 Ibid., paras 42–49.
63 Directive 2014/54/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 Apr. 2014 on measures facilitating the exercise of rights conferred on workers in the context of freedom of movement for workers, OJEU L 128/8 of 30 Apr. 2014.
64 Depesme, para. 53.
65 Art. 2(2) of Directive 2014/54. Depesme, para. 54.
66 Depesme, para. 58.
67 Ibid., para. 62.
68 Ibid., para. 58 and 60.
69 Ibid., para. 60.
70 Ibid.
71 Ibid.
72 Interestingly, in Bragança Linares Verruga, the Court rather focused on the fact that because the recipients of the financial aid were not the frontier workers themselves but their non-resident children, ‘the link with Luxembourg society may, in this respect, be less apparent in (…) [their case] than in the case of the children of migrant workers resident in Luxembourg’, para. 56. As Denis Martin had anticipated, this introduces a fundamental difference between this two types of children of EU migrant workers based on the working status of their parents: D. Martin, Arrêts ‘Giersch’ et ‘Prinz’: les différents statuts de l’étudiant, 201 J. de droit européen 270–274 (2013). For a similar conclusion, read: A. Iliopoulou-Penot, Le rattachement à l’Etat comme critère de l’intégration sociale Revue des Affaires Européennes 651–665, 655 (2013). For a more general analysis of the notion of integration in the case-law of the CJEU, read also: E. Neframi, Principe d’intégration et pouvoirs de l’Etat membre Revue des Affaires Européennes 705–714 (2013)
73 For a detailed analysis of this case, see F. De Witte, Who Funds the Mobile Student? Shedding Some Light on the Normative Assumptions Underlying EU Free Movement Law: Commission v. The Netherlands, 50 Common Mkt. L. Rev. 203–215 (2013).
74 See the Opinion of Advocate General Sharpston in Commission v. The Netherlands, para. 147.
75 S. O’Leary, The Curious Case of Frontier Workers and Study Finance: Giersch, 51 Common Mkt. L. Rev. 601–622, 621 (2014).
76 Giersch, para. 64–65. For critical analyses of the notion of ‘real link’, read: P. J. Neuvonen, In Search of (Even) More Substance for the ‘Real Link’ Test: Comment on Prinz and Seeberger, 39(1) Eur. L. Rev. 125– 136 (2014).
77 Giersch, para. 72. See also for instance: Judgment of the Court of 18 July 2007, Gertraud Hartmann v. Freistaat Bayern, C-212/05, EU:C:2007:437.
78 See for instance: Judgment of the Court of 25 Oct. 2012, Déborah Prete v. Office national de l’emploi, C-367/11, EU:C:2012:668, para. 50.
79 Giersch, para. 81.
80 Loi du 23 juillet 2016.
81 This is the case of a university certificate in psychology delivered by a Belgian University (Administrative Court, decision of 22 Oct. 2014, application no. 32193) or the certificate of a private institution for higher education in France, which is delivered in partnership with national universities (Administrative Court, decision of 14 Dec. 2015, application no. 35733, confirmed on appeal: Higher Administrative Court, decision of 24 Jan. 2017, application no. 38145C).
82 Loi du 23 juillet 2016.
83 For instance, regarding family allowances granted to students above eighteen in Belgium, see Administrative Court, decision of 1 June 2016, application no. 36209, confirmed on appeal: Higher Administrative Court, decision of 16 Feb. 2017, application no. 38151C.
