CEDH · PRESS;ADMISSIBILITYDECISIONS;ENG — 4 février 2010

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA678F94A { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right; font-size:11pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sE202B2ED { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .sE0D34C67 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s1F6AC3E7 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s289A4F99 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:36pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s99A63BFE { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; font-size:11pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s84B1523C { width:91.5pt; display:inline-block } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s4BAE41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt } .s92A5AB2 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .sBA813D16 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; text-decoration:underline; color:#0000ff } .sC800182F { font-family:Arial; color:#0000ff } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline }   094 04.02.2010   Press release issued by the Registrar   Admissibility decision   Andrzej Zubczewski v. Sweden (application no. 16149/08)   Unanimously: application inadmissible     Different old-age pension levels for single and married persons not in breach of the Convention   Principal facts   The applicant, Mr Andrzej Zubczewski, is a Swedish national who was born in 1939 and lives in Spain.   Upon his retirement, he started receiving an old-age pension calculated in respect of his civil status, which was single at the time.   In 2002, Mr Zubczewski got married. Following this, the Social Insurance Office, applying the Old-Age Pension Act, reduced his pension by about 50 Euros a month. He complained against this decision emphasising that his wife did not have any income. His complaint was dismissed by the Social Security Office and by the competent administrative court; his appeal was not allowed by the higher courts.   Complaints, procedure and composition of the Court   Relying in particular on Article 1 of Protocol No 1 to the Convention (protection of property) and on Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination), the applicant complained that the decrease in his pension had resulted in a discriminatory deprivation of his property.   The application was lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 14 February 2008.   The decision was given by a Chamber of seven judges, composed as follows:   Josep Casadevall (Andorra), President , Elisabet Fura (Sweden), Corneliu Bîrsan (Romania), Boštjan M. Zupančič (Slovenia), Alvina Gyulumyan (Armenia), Egbert Myjer (the Netherlands), Ann Power (Ireland), judges ,   and Stanley Naismith , Deputy Section Registrar ,   Decision of the Court   The Court first noted that the monthly pension received by Mr Zubczewski after his marriage was about 50 Euros less than what he had received previously as a single man. Therefore, the case did not concern difference in treatment between married and unmarried couples as such.   The reduction in the pension in accordance with the relevant domestic legislation had been explained with the principle that the cost of living for people who shared a home was lower than that for a single person who had to cater for all expenses on his own. Despite the fact that Mr Zubczewski’s wife had been economically dependant on him, the Court found that his situation could not be equated with that of a single person.   The Court held therefore that the legislation in question, establishing different pension levels for different categories of persons, and the decision of the authorities based on it fell squarely within the discretion enjoyed by the State in social and economic strategy matters. Consequently, as there had been no violation of Article 14 in conjunction with Article 1 of Protocol No 1 of the Convention, the application had to be rejected as manifestly ill-founded.   ***   The decision is only available in English.   This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. The decisions are available on its website ( http://www.echr.coe.int )     Press contacts Kristina Pencheva-Malinowski (tel : + 33 (0)3 88 41 35 70) or Stefano Piedimonte (tel : + 33 (0)3 90 21 42 04) Tracey Turner-Tretz (tel : + 33 (0)3 88 41 35 30) Céline Menu-Lange (tel : + 33 (0)3 90 21 58 77) or Frédéric Dolt (tel : + 33 (0)3 90 21 53 39) Nina Salomon (tel + 33 (0)3 90 21 49 79)     The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.