Turning to the case at hand, which can be considered as the third round of the discussion, the CJEU examined the legal basis for a measure updating provisions on the coordination of
social security systems between EU and Turkey as established by the Agreement, taking into account the «state of play» of a gradual extension of the free movement of workers between both contracting parties.
Not exact matches
But that's not the case in Arizona, which requires businesses to use E-verify, a
system in which businesses electronically verify that the documentation presented by a potential employee has matching information
between the name and the
social security number (securing proof of eligibility to work).
Project Jasper, a joint effort
between the private sector and Canada's central bank and payment
systems operator over the past two years, is a good example of this type of work, and is a blueprint that the U.S. should follow if we ever want to see blockchain become a viable
Social Security number replacement.
«Together, we've made enormous strides towards building a
system of
social security that gets the balance right
between state help and self help.
Identification of common records
between both
systems depends on the accuracy of the
social security number match with name.
This edition of our questions and answers series examines how age requirements, payroll taxes, and benefits payable differ
between the railroad retirement and
social security systems.
Similarly, in case C - 656 / 11 UK v Council, the CJEU ruled that the same applies to a measure implementing the association agreement
between the EU and the Swiss Confederation, since the association agreement extended to the Switzerland the application of the EU legislation concerning coordination of
social security systems, putting Switzerland in similar position as an EU Member State.
59 As several of the governments which have filed observations have pointed out, the opposite interpretation would lead to unjustifiable differences in treatment
between Member States, according to how their national
social security systems are organised, given that the «special» nature of a benefit such as the one at issue in the main proceedings — and, as a consequence, the fact that it falls within the scope of Regulation No 883/2004 — depends, inter alia, on whether the grant of that benefit is based, under national law, on objective criteria or solely on the state of need of the person concerned.
The Swiss
system consists of an interaction
between different
social security branches, private insurers and the liability insurance or payments by the injuring party, respectively.
X, the Czech
Social Security Administration as a field of pension insurance in the Czech Republic refused to grant the applicant Match zčeského partial retirement pension to the level as if all the insurance in the dissolution of the Czech and Slovak Federative Republic Czech obtained in the pension insurance
system (as insurance periods into extinction CSFR, ie 31.12.1992, pursuant to Article 20 of the Treaty
between the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic on
Social Security (No. 228/1993 Coll.)
[3] On the basis of the applicant's cassation appeal with the Supreme Administrative Court by order dated 9.5.2012, No. 6 Ads 18/2012 -82, reversed in accordance with Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union concerning the interpretation of European Union law on the Court and presented him the following questions: 6 Ads 18/2012 First Excludes Council Regulation (EC) No 1408/71 on the application of
social security schemes nazaměstna not persons and their families moving within the Community (Regulation of the European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems), from its scope ratione personae citizen of the Czech Republic, which, in circumstances such as those in the present case, before 1 First 1993 subject to the laws governing pension defunct State (Czech and Slovak Federal Republic), Acting in accordance with these periods sčlánkem 20 of the Treaty concluded on the 29th 10th 1992 between the Czech and Slovak republikouo Social Security registered in Annex III of Regulation (EC) No 1408/71 (Annex II of the European Parliament and Council Regulation No 883/2004) are regarded as periods Slovak Republic apodlevnitrostátního rules created by the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic at the same time as the time Czech Rep
social security schemes nazaměstna not persons and their families moving within the Community (Regulation of the European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems), from its scope ratione personae citizen of the Czech Republic, which, in circumstances such as those in the present case, before 1 First 1993 subject to the laws governing pension defunct State (Czech and Slovak Federal Republic), Acting in accordance with these periods sčlánkem 20 of the Treaty concluded on the 29th 10th 1992 between the Czech and Slovak republikouo Social Security registered in Annex III of Regulation (EC) No 1408/71 (Annex II of the European Parliament and Council Regulation No 883/2004) are regarded as periods Slovak Republic apodlevnitrostátního rules created by the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic at the same time as the time Czech R
security schemes nazaměstna not persons and their families moving within the Community (Regulation of the European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of
social security systems), from its scope ratione personae citizen of the Czech Republic, which, in circumstances such as those in the present case, before 1 First 1993 subject to the laws governing pension defunct State (Czech and Slovak Federal Republic), Acting in accordance with these periods sčlánkem 20 of the Treaty concluded on the 29th 10th 1992 between the Czech and Slovak republikouo Social Security registered in Annex III of Regulation (EC) No 1408/71 (Annex II of the European Parliament and Council Regulation No 883/2004) are regarded as periods Slovak Republic apodlevnitrostátního rules created by the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic at the same time as the time Czech Rep
social security systems), from its scope ratione personae citizen of the Czech Republic, which, in circumstances such as those in the present case, before 1 First 1993 subject to the laws governing pension defunct State (Czech and Slovak Federal Republic), Acting in accordance with these periods sčlánkem 20 of the Treaty concluded on the 29th 10th 1992 between the Czech and Slovak republikouo Social Security registered in Annex III of Regulation (EC) No 1408/71 (Annex II of the European Parliament and Council Regulation No 883/2004) are regarded as periods Slovak Republic apodlevnitrostátního rules created by the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic at the same time as the time Czech R
security systems), from its scope ratione personae citizen of the Czech Republic, which, in circumstances such as those in the present case, before 1 First 1993 subject to the laws governing pension defunct State (Czech and Slovak Federal Republic), Acting in accordance with these periods sčlánkem 20 of the Treaty concluded on the 29th 10th 1992
between the Czech and Slovak republikouo
Social Security registered in Annex III of Regulation (EC) No 1408/71 (Annex II of the European Parliament and Council Regulation No 883/2004) are regarded as periods Slovak Republic apodlevnitrostátního rules created by the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic at the same time as the time Czech Rep
Social Security registered in Annex III of Regulation (EC) No 1408/71 (Annex II of the European Parliament and Council Regulation No 883/2004) are regarded as periods Slovak Republic apodlevnitrostátního rules created by the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic at the same time as the time Czech R
Security registered in Annex III of Regulation (EC) No 1408/71 (Annex II of the European Parliament and Council Regulation No 883/2004) are regarded as periods Slovak Republic apodlevnitrostátního rules created by the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic at the same time as the time Czech Republic?