Judgment_paragraph 41 · Georgi Ivanov Elchinov v Natsionalna zdravnoosiguritelna kasa (C-173/09)

41Although prior authorisation, such as that required by Article 36 of the Law on sickness insurance, constitutes, for both patients and service providers, an obstacle to the freedom to provide services (see, to that effect, Kohll, paragraph 35; Case C-157/99 Smits and Peerbooms [2001] ECR I-5473, paragraph 69; Case C-385/99 Müller-Fauré and van Riet [2003] ECR I-4509, paragraph 44; and Watts, paragraph 98), the Court has nevertheless held that Article 49 EC does not in principle preclude the right of a patient to receive hospital treatment in another Member State at the expense of the system with which he is registered from being subject to prior authorisation (Smits and Peerbooms, paragraph 82, and Watts, paragraph 113).

Georgi Ivanov Elchinov v Natsionalna zdravnoosiguritelna kasa (C-173/09)

Key facts

History · 1 version

Connections