Government studies implications of EU “benefit tourism” ruling

Government officials are examining the implications of a landmark ruling which may allow authorities to refuse welfare benefits to EU migrants if they have never held a job in the State.

The European Court of Justice ruled this week that Germany was entitled to refuse unemployment benefits to "economically inactive" EU migrants. Germany's position was supported by the Irish Government, Britain and Denmark.

The ruling relates to non-contributary benefits only, where a person has not made contributions through the tax system.

The case concerned a 25-year-old Romanian woman, identified as Ms Dano, who has been living in Germany since at least 2010 and has had a child there, but is not seeking employment.

Local authorities argued there was a lack of evidence to show the woman had ever sought employment. In its ruling, the court emphasised that EU migrants have the right to reside in another EU state for up to three months – but the member state is under no obligation to pay benefits during this period.

Right of residence

If migrants stay for between three months and five years, this right of residence depends on the person’s ability to support himself or herself or their family.

In a statement, a spokeswoman for Minister for Social Protection Joan Burton said the ruling was important to ensure free movement of workers and citizens across the EU was used for the "right motives and not abused through unjustified claiming of benefits".

She said: "The court has reiterated that the right of residence of migrants who are not workers is dependent on them having sufficient resources for themselves and their families so that they are not an unreasonable burden on the social assistance system of the host country. The implications of this judgment are being considered by the Department of Social Protection. "

Germany’s labour ministry said the right to freedom of movement across the EU was a “high principle”.