Belgium / Belgian Constitutional Court / ECLI:BE:GHCC:2024:ARR.044

ASBL « Federale Vereniging voor Klinische Laboratoria », ASBL « Société Belge des Pharmaciens Spécialistes en Biologie Clinique », SRL « Medilab », Jozef Jonckheere and Philippe Cuigniez v Conseil des ministers.
Deciding body type
National Court/Tribunal
Type
Decision
Decision date
11/04/2024
ECLI (European case law identifier)
ECLI:BE:GHCC:2024:ARR.044
  • Belgium / Belgian Constitutional Court / ECLI:BE:GHCC:2024:ARR.044

    Key facts of the case:

    The applicants sought the annulment of Article 22 of the Law of 29 November 2022. That law reformed provisions relating to healthcare and notably to the reimbursement of expenses by insurances. The Article attacked prevents care providers from charging extra fees to a group of beneficiaries when providing outpatient care. The measure applies to the patients who benefit from a special measure (increased insurance or intervention majorée), offered to beneficiaires of social assistance benefits, and granting them a better reimbursement of their health expenses.  

    The parties, legal persons representing medical profesionnals, consider that the measure is contrary to various legal provisions, in particular freedom to provide services and freedom of establishement, as well as Article 15 (2) of the Charter.  

    Key legal question raised by the Court:

    The third ground invoked by the applicants concern the violation of Articles 10, 11 and 23 of the Belgian Constitution, read in light of freedom to provide services enshrined in Article 49 TFEU, Articles 56 and 57 TFEU as well as Article 15(2) of the Charter. The latter protects the freedom of every citizen of the EU to seek employment, to work, to exercise the right of establishment and to provide services in any Member State. 

    Outcome of the case: 

    The Court first examines the legality of  the provision in light of Belgian law. It rules that this measure does not violate the Belgian Constitution nor the provisions of the TFEU mentioned above. According to the Court, the contested measure pursues a general interest aim, it is adequate to ensure the achievement of that aim and does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the aim pursued. The aim of the contested provisions is to ‘increase tariff security for low-income households’. The law therefore aims to protect the health of the beneficiaries of the increased insurance contribution, an objective set out in Article 36 of the TFEU and which may constitute, an overriding reason relating to the public interest capable of justifying a restriction on freedom of establishment (points B.18.1 and B.18.2). Therefore, the Court concludes that the Belgian law is not contrary to the Constitution, in particular its Articles 10 and 11, read in light of relevant provisions of the Treaties. 

    After reaching this conclusion, the Court underlines that this conclusion is also reached in light of the Charter, in particular Article 15, §2 (point B.18.5). This provision also recognises freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services and Article 52, §2 specifies that rights protected in the Treaties are exercised within the limits defined by the latter. Therefore, EU law further confirms the conclusion reached in light of Belgian Constitutional law.

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter

    B.18.5. An examination in the light of Article 15(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union could not lead to a different conclusion. This provision recognises the freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services, which are also guaranteed by Articles 49 and 56 of the TFEU. Article 52(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union provides that the rights recognised therein and provided for in the Treaties are to be exercised under the conditions and within the limits defined by those Treaties. 

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter (original language)

    B.18.5. Un examen à la lumière de l’article 15, paragraphe 2, de la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne ne pourrait conduire à une autre conclusion. En effet, cette disposition reconnaît la liberté d’établissement et la libre prestation des services, également garanties par les articles 49 et 56 du TFUE. Or, la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne dispose, aux termes de son article 52, paragraphe 2, que les droits qui y sont reconnus et qui font l’objet de dispositions dans les traités s’exercent dans les conditions  et limites définies par ceux-ci.