Onder 6.15 Parket bij de Hoge Raad 19 februari 2015

“85. The Court does not, therefore, consider that the payment of NICs [National Insurance contributions; PJW] is alone sufficient to place the applicants in a relevantly similar position to all other pensioners, regardless of their country of residence. Moreover, in relation to the comparison with pensioners living in the United Kingdom, it cannot be ignored that social security benefits, including State pensions, are part of a system of social welfare which exist to ensure certain minimum standards of living for residents of the United Kingdom. The duty imposed on the Secretary of State in the Social Security Administration Act 1992 to review the sums specified for the various benefits covered by the Act, including the State pension, is to determine “whether they have retained their value in relation to the general level of prices obtaining in Great Britain” (…). The scheme of the primary legislation is, as the Court of Appeal said, “entirely geared to the impact on the pension of price inflation in the United Kingdom” (…). The essentially national character of the social security system is itself recognised in the relevant international instruments, the 1952 ILO Convention and the 1964 European Code of Social Security, which empower the suspension of benefits to which a person would otherwise be entitled for as long as the person concerned is absent from the territory of the State concerned (…).

$ curl -s https://bron.page/api/v1/blobs/b99b24ee5e392a86f16652b9d8d34a1e3494cdde271314e284396658accdea0b | shasum -a 256