Brussels, 22/02/2012 (Agence Europe) - The provision in Dutch legislation on the funding of higher studies, which reserves the funding of studies abroad (portable funding) to students who have lived in the Netherlands for three out of the six years prior to registering, is disproportionate to the objective pursued and runs counter to the free movement of workers, states Advocate General Eleanor Sharpston, in her conclusions returned on 16 February in Case C-542/09.
The Netherlands justifies this provision, which applies to all students irrespective of their nationality, by reasons of economy and the social objective of encouraging students to travel to other member states to study and return to the Netherlands enriched by the experience. The residence condition is justified, they argue, by the different situation of people working in their country but residing elsewhere from that of Dutch workers and migrants residing in the Netherlands.
Agreeing with the European Commission, Sharpston overturned this reasoning, considering it indirectly discriminatory against migrant workers (particularly cross-border workers). She considered that this condition affects national workers to a lesser extent than migrant workers in a similar situation, as it always implies a distinction between workers who are not obliged to change domicile in order to satisfy this residence condition and those who are. She adds that Dutch workers would be more able to comply with the “three out of six years” rule than migrant workers residing in the Netherlands. This residence condition therefore creates indirect discrimination. (FG/transl.fl)