Free movement of patients as recipients of services - Cases - Geraets-Smits and Peerbooms case
4 important questions on Free movement of patients as recipients of services - Cases - Geraets-Smits and Peerbooms case
What is the topic of the Geraets-Smits and Peerbooms case
- Innovative health care
- are patients entitled to reimbursement of the costs of more innovative healthcare in another MS?
What are the facts of the Geraets-Smits and Peerbooms case?
- Dutch sickness fund refused reimbursement
- bc treatment cannot be considered "normal in the professional circles concerned"
- and treatment are not medically necessary: bc treatment in NL available
What were the 2 conditions under the national legislation in order to receive medical treatment funded by the insurance?
- Treatment must be considered normal
- treatment must be necessary
- Higher grades + faster learning
- Never study anything twice
- 100% sure, 100% understanding
What were the findings of the CJEU in the Geraets-Smits and Peerbooms case?
- The rules on free movement of services is also applicable to benefit-in-kind schemes
- Requirement that treatment must be normal and medically necessary = restrictions on free movement
- it is possible that a PA is justified bv. Financial balance
- a PA must be necessary and reasonable, not arbitrary and objective
THIS CASE: restriction not justified bv arbitrary that NL determines what is "normal"
The question on the page originate from the summary of the following study material:
- A unique study and practice tool
- Never study anything twice again
- Get the grades you hope for
- 100% sure, 100% understanding