出版社：Igitur, Utrecht Publishing and Archiving Services
其他摘要：Normal 0 21 false false false EN-GB X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:Standaardtabel; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:8.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:107%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-ansi-language:EN-GB; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} Social occupational pension schemes, i.e. compulsory pension schemes that are the result of collective bargaining, fulfil an important social function. At the same time, they seem to conflict with some fundamental single market tenets, such as the European Union (EU) Single Market’s four fundamental freedoms and competition law principles. In this respect, occupational pension schemes in the Member States seem to embody the inherent tensions contained within the EU’s social market economy: a clash between market and social values. This article examines the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and EU legislation on occupational pensions, in order to examine whether one of the two values can be identified as dominant. Specifically, it will answer the question whether EU law and CJEU case law can be said to support social occupational pensions, or whether internal market objectives prevail.
