Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
PDF 102kWORD 18k
7 February 2018
Question for written answer P-000790-18
to the Commission
Rule 130
Helga Stevens (ECR)

 Subject:  Fraud involving use of E 101/A1 documents
 Answer in writing 
On 6 February 2018, the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice, handing down its judgment in the Altun Case (C‐359/16), ruled that that a national judges may disregard an E 101/A1‐ social security document that was fraudulently obtained or relied on. The Court clarified that this was the case where the issuing institution was informed of the fraud and failed to reconsider within a reasonable time whether the certificate had been rightfully issued, the central principle being ‘fraus omnia corrompit’ (paragraphs 48 to 49).In view of this:
1. Does the Commission consider the adage ‘fraus omnia corrumpit’ to be a general principle of European law?

On 13 December 2016, the Commission tabled its proposal for regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 and Regulation (EC) No 987/2009. Neither in the Commission proposal nor in the above regulations is any provision made for a host Member State to disregard an E 101/A1‐document.

2. Does the Commission nevertheless consider the adage ‘fraus omnia corrompit’ to be applicable as a general principle of EC law?

3. Alternatively, is the Commission, with its proposed amendment to Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 987/2009, seeking to enforce in every case the binding nature of the E 101/A1‐document and the exclusive competence of the issuing institution, notwithstanding the ‘fraus omnia corrompit’ principle?

Original language of question: NL 
Last updated: 19 February 2018Legal notice