Torna alla ricerca
Corte cost. 21.7.2026, n. 141, pres. Amoroso, est. Sangiorgio
| | | |Assegno sociale – esclusione dei titolari di permesso unico lavoro – questioni di illegittimità costituzionale con riferimento agli artt. 3,11,117 riferito all’art. 34, parr. 1 e 2 CDFUE e art. 12 direttiva 2011/98 – sentenza CGUE 5.3.26 Luevi - non fondatezza – compatibilità costituzionale della assenza di prestazioni minime di sostegno a persone anziane bisognose - estensione del thema decidendum - inammissibilità
Per effetto della sentenza CGUE 5.3.2026, C-151/24, Luevi – secondo la quale la direttiva 2011/98 non osta a una disposizione nazionale che escluda dal diritto all’assegno sociale gli stranieri titolari di permesso unico lavoro – devono essere dichiarate non fondate le questioni di legittimità costituzionale dell’art. 80, comma 19, l. 388/2000, nella parte in cui escludono i titolari di permesso unico lavoro dal diritto all’assegno sociale, sollevate dalla Corte di Cassazione con riferimento agli artt. 3, 11, 117, primo comma Cost. quest’ultimo in relazione all’art. 34, par. 1 e 2 CDFUE e art. 12, par. 1, lettera e) direttiva 2011/98; non può invece essere esaminata - in quanto comporterebbe un ampliamento del thema decidendum posto dal giudice rimettente - la questione se sia compatibile con gli artt. 3 e 38 Cost., la condizione di un anziano straniero non occasionalmente presente sul territorio (essendo ivi regolarmente residente da oltre 10 anni) che si trovi in condizioni di totale indigenza o comunque inferiori alla soglia di povertà assoluta e che, ciononostante, venga lasciato privo dell’unico sostegno previsto dall’ordinamento per tali situazioni, indispensabile a garantirgli una vita dignitosa.
Social allowance – exclusion of holders of a single work permit – questions of constitutional legitimacy with reference to Articles 3, 11 and 117 [of the Constitution], the latter in relation to Article 34(1) and (2) CFREU and Article 12 of Directive 2011/98 – CJEU judgment of 5.3.2026, Luevi – unfoundedness – constitutional compatibility of the absence of minimum support benefits for elderly persons in need – extension of the thema decidendum – inadmissibility
Following the CJEU judgment of 5 March 2026, Case C-151/24, Luevi – according to which Directive 2011/98 does not preclude a national provision excluding foreign nationals holding a single work permit from entitlement to the social allowance – the questions of constitutional legitimacy of Article 80(19) of Law No. 388/2000, insofar as it excludes holders of a single work permit from entitlement to the social allowance, raised by the Court of Cassation with reference to Articles 3, 11 and 117(1) of the Constitution, the latter in relation to Article 34(1) and (2) CFREU and Article 12(1)(e) of Directive 2011/98, must be declared unfounded; conversely, the question of whether it is compatible with Articles 3 and 38 of the Constitution for an elderly foreign national who is not merely occasionally present within the territory (having lawfully resided there for more than ten years) and who finds himself in a condition of total indigence, or in any event below the absolute poverty threshold, to nonetheless be left without the only form of support provided by the legal system for such situations — one indispensable to guaranteeing him a dignified life — cannot be examined, since this would entail an expansion of the thema decidendum as framed by the referring court.
Social allowance – exclusion of holders of a single work permit – questions of constitutional legitimacy with reference to Articles 3, 11 and 117 [of the Constitution], the latter in relation to Article 34(1) and (2) CFREU and Article 12 of Directive 2011/98 – CJEU judgment of 5.3.2026, Luevi – unfoundedness – constitutional compatibility of the absence of minimum support benefits for elderly persons in need – extension of the thema decidendum – inadmissibility
Following the CJEU judgment of 5 March 2026, Case C-151/24, Luevi – according to which Directive 2011/98 does not preclude a national provision excluding foreign nationals holding a single work permit from entitlement to the social allowance – the questions of constitutional legitimacy of Article 80(19) of Law No. 388/2000, insofar as it excludes holders of a single work permit from entitlement to the social allowance, raised by the Court of Cassation with reference to Articles 3, 11 and 117(1) of the Constitution, the latter in relation to Article 34(1) and (2) CFREU and Article 12(1)(e) of Directive 2011/98, must be declared unfounded; conversely, the question of whether it is compatible with Articles 3 and 38 of the Constitution for an elderly foreign national who is not merely occasionally present within the territory (having lawfully resided there for more than ten years) and who finds himself in a condition of total indigence, or in any event below the absolute poverty threshold, to nonetheless be left without the only form of support provided by the legal system for such situations — one indispensable to guaranteeing him a dignified life — cannot be examined, since this would entail an expansion of the thema decidendum as framed by the referring court.