Europe’s relationship with its Member States’ national welfare systems attracts
the headlines nowadays. In particular, the negotiations regarding a new settlement for the
UK in a reformed European Union and the referendum to follow, which may result in a
UK exit from the EU (‘Brexit’), seem to have exposed the tensions in this relationship to a
higher degree than ever. Thus, this article goes to the heart of the puzzle and seeks to throw
light upon the existing tensions in thinking. The analysis anchors itself in the following
three themes: (1) the conundrum inherent in the overall simmering feud, if viewed as a
clash of different perspectives; (2) the overall role of the Court of Justice of the European
Union (CJEU) in supporting or curing these tensions, where recurring issues are, among
others, judicial activism in the context of social benefits; and (3) recent thinking in EU legal
scholarship in the area. Although all three themes are strongly inter-related, the first of
them may be viewed as a macro-theme; the second as a micro-theme; and the third as a
more critical and normative theme serving as a kind of self-reflective wing mirror.