[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	Northern Ireland - Social Security and Child Support Commissioners' Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Northern Ireland - Social Security and Child Support Commissioners' Decisions >> [1989] NISSCSC C4-88(UB) (9 August 1989) URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NISSCSC/1989/C4-88(UB).html Cite as: [1989] NISSCSC C4-88(UB)

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

[1989] NISSCSC C4-88(UB) (9 August 1989)

 


Decision No: C4/88(UB)

SOCIAL SECURITY (NORTHERN IRELAND) ACTS 1975 TO 1988 UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFIT Appeal to the Social Security Commissioner on a question of law from the decision of the Banbridge Social Security Appeal Tribunal given on 8 September 1988 DECISION OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSIONER
1. This is an appeal by the claimant against the decision of a Social Security Appeal Tribunal which held that unemployment benefit was not payable to her from 2 November 1987 to 21 February 1988 because she did not satisfy the first contribution condition laid down by the Social Security (Northern Ireland) Act 1975.
2. At the hearing before me claimant was represented by Mr Desmond Bowes, Solicitor of Messrs Byrne & Herbert, Solicitors and the Adjudication Officer was represented by Mr Noel Kelly, Solicitor of the Department of Health & Social Services.
3. The facts in this case are not in dispute. The claimant was born in England in September 1963 and at the age of 12 went with her parents to reside in the Republic of Ireland. She completed her education there and when she left school she obtained employment and continued in that employment for 8 years until October 1987 when her family moved to Northern Ireland. She gave up her work to come with them. During the period of her employment in the Republic of Ireland she made PRSI contributions, which are the Republic of Ireland's equivalent to our National Insurance Contributions. She claimed unemployment benefit in Northern Ireland and sought to get the benefit of her contributions in the Republic of Ireland. The Adjudication Officer decided that her contributions in the Republic of Ireland could not count towards satisfying the requirements of the Social Security Act of 1975 which required that National Insurance Contributions be paid for a period before unemployment benefit could be payable.
4. Claimant appealed against that decision to a Social Security Appeal Tribunal which upheld the decision of the Adjudication Officer. In its decision the Tribunal accepted that the law was correctly set out in the Adjudication Officer's submission to the Tribunal. In that submission the Adjudication Officer submitted that the issue was whether claimant's Republic of Ireland employment and/or insurance can assist towards satisfaction of the contribution conditions for entitlement to United Kingdom unemployment benefit, under the Social Security provisions of the European Economic Community. He went on to say it was not in dispute that Miss H… had not paid the relevant United Kingdom Class I contributions and the real question at issue was whether she can be assisted by the EEC Regulations. In the submission the Adjudication Officer then went on to quote the relevant EEC Regulations and referred to Article 67(1) of regulation 1408/71 which provides –

"1. The competent institution of a Member State whose legislation makes the acquisition, retention or recovery of the right of benefits subject to the completion of periods of insurance shall take into account, to the extent necessary, periods of insurance or employment completed as an employed person under the legislation of any other Member State, as though they were periods of insurance completed under the legislation which it administers, provided, however, that the periods of employment would have been counted as periods of insurance had they been completed under that legislation."

He then considered her entitlement under Article 71(1) which provides, as far as is relevant in the present case, that –

"1. An unemployed person who was formerly employed and who, during the last employment, was residing in the territory of a Member State other than the competent State shall receive benefits in accordance with the following provisions:

(a) ……

(b) (i) (not relevant);

(ii) an employed person, other than a frontier worker, who is wholly unemployed and who makes himself available for work to the employment services in the territory of the member State in which he resides, or who returns to that territory, shall receive benefits in accordance with the legislation of that State as if he had last been employed there; …."

The Adjudication Officer relied upon a Reported Decision No. R(U) 4/84 of the Great Britain Commissioner who considered an application of the Regulations to a claim for unemployment benefit in a case similar to this one. It was held that "Competent Institution" and "Competent State" are normally those of the Member State under whose legislation claimant was lastly employed. The Adjudication Officer argued that a claimant who had not been in employment following a return to a Member State could not satisfy the condition of Article 67(3) unless able to invoke Article 71(1)(a)(ii) or 71(1)(b)(ii). Article 71 is limited in this application to a claimant who during his last employment was resident in a Member State other than the competent state. Article 71(1)(a)(ii) is not relevant as it refers to frontier workers. The Adjudication Officer then submits that during the claimant's period of claim the Republic of Ireland was the Competent State by virtue of the fact that she was last insured during her employment there and the only way she could bring herself within the regulations was to show that at the time she was last employed in the Republic of Ireland she was resident in the United Kingdom, and it is not argued on her behalf that that was the case.

5. I have considered all the arguments in this case. I am very much obliged to Mr Kelly and to Mr Bowes for the work which they have put into their various submissions. I have considered R(U) 4/84 which is a case very similar to this one. I am satisfied that the regulations referred to apply only to a person who during his last employment was resident in a Member State other than the Competent State and that the Competent State in this connection is the Member State under whose legislation claimant was last employed. I am satisfied, as was the Tribunal, that the law as set out in the Adjudication Officer's submission to the Appeal Tribunal is correct and for this reason I am satisfied that there was no error of law in the findings of the Tribunal. I am satisfied that claimant is not entitled to count her PRSI contributions in the Republic of Ireland towards unemployment benefit in the United Kingdom. I therefore dismiss the appeal.

C.C. G McNALLY

COMMISSIONER

9 August 1989