EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-268/13: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 9 October 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Sibiu — Romania) — Elena Petru v Casa Județeană de Asigurări de Sănătate Sibiu, Casa Națională de Asigurări de Sănătate (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social security — Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 — Article 22(2), second subparagraph — Health insurance — Hospital treatment provided in another Member State — Prior authorisation refused — Lack of medication and basic medical supplies and infrastructure)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62013CA0268

62013CA0268

October 9, 2014
With Google you find a lot.
With us you find everything. Try it now!

I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!

Valentina R., lawyer

Official Journal of the European Union

C 439/5

(Case C-268/13) (<span class="super">1</span>)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social security - Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 - Article 22(2), second subparagraph - Health insurance - Hospital treatment provided in another Member State - Prior authorisation refused - Lack of medication and basic medical supplies and infrastructure)

(2014/C 439/07)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Elena Petru

Defendants: Casa Județeană de Asigurări de Sănătate Sibiu, Casa Națională de Asigurări de Sănătate

Operative part of the judgment

The second subparagraph of Article 22(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community, as amended and updated by Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of 2 December 1996, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 592/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008, must be interpreted as meaning that the authorisation necessary under Article 22(1)(c)(i) of that regulation cannot be refused where it is because of a lack of medication and basic medical supplies and infrastructure that the hospital care concerned cannot be provided in good time in the insured person’s Member State of residence. The question whether that is impossible must be determined by reference to all the hospital establishments in that Member State that are capable of providing the treatment in question and by reference to the period within which the treatment could be obtained in good time.

*

Language of the case: Romanian.

(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 207, 20.7.2013.

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia