## Facts

- D. M. Levin, a British national, resided in the Netherlands with her non-EU (South African) husband.
- She performed part-time employment in the Netherlands and earned wages below Dutch minimum subsistence standards.
- Levin and her husband supplemented her wages with income from investments.
- Dutch authorities refused Levin a residence permit, reasoning that she lacked “gainful employment” because her part-time earnings were below national subsistence and full-time thresholds.
- Levin challenged the refusal, asserting a right to reside as a “worker” under Article 48 EEC and related EU rules on free movement of workers.
- The Netherlands Council of State referred questions to the European Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling on the meaning of “worker” and the residence rights of low-paid part-time workers.

## Issues

1. Whether a Member State national performing part-time work in another Member State, with earnings below that State’s minimum subsistence level, qualifies as a “worker” under Article 48 EEC.
2. Whether it matters that the person supplements low wages with other income or is willing to live below the minimum subsistence level.
3. Whether the motives for taking up employment in another Member State are relevant to the right to enter and reside.

## Decision

- The Court held that “worker” and “activity as an employed person” are EU-law concepts that may not be interpreted restrictively because they define the scope of a fundamental Treaty freedom.
- The Court ruled that Article 48 EEC covers a person who undertakes part-time employment in another Member State even if earnings are below the minimum required for subsistence, so long as the work is “effective and genuine.”
- The Court held it is irrelevant whether the person supplements wages with other resources or instead accepts living on less than the subsistence minimum.
- The Court held the worker’s motives for seeking employment in another Member State are irrelevant to entry and residence rights, provided the person pursues or seeks to pursue effective and genuine employment.
- The Court provided interpretive guidance and left application of that standard to the referring national court.

## Legal Principles

- “Worker” under EU free movement law is an autonomous concept that must be interpreted broadly and uniformly, not by restrictive national income or hours thresholds.
- Part-time employment can confer “worker” status even where remuneration is below sectoral minimum pay or below a national subsistence minimum.
- The key limitation is that the employment must be “effective and genuine,” not merely marginal or ancillary.
- Reliance on supplementary income does not defeat worker status.
- Subjective motives for migration do not limit free movement rights when the person actually pursues or genuinely seeks employment.

## Conclusion

The Court recognized that low-paid part-time employment may still establish “worker” status and related residence rights under EU law when the work is effective and genuine, and it rejected national rules that would deny those rights based on insufficient earnings, supplementary resources, or the worker’s motives.


Levin v. Staatssecretaris van Justitie (Case 53/81), 1982 E.C.R. 1035 (E.C.J. 1982)