Practical implication of Judgment in Case C-754/18 to family members of EU citizens according to EU 2004/38/EC [closed]

CJEU recently made a Judgment in Case C-754/18.

http://curia.europa.eu/juris/documents.jsf?num=C-754/18

What practical implications it may have to family members of EU citizens according to EU 2004/38/EC.

The first point made by CJEU is that a permanent residence card according to Article 20 is at least equivalent to residence card according to Article 10.

Honestly, to claim otherwise is very stupid and I remember that European Commision already said it years before. Finally, there is a final argument to this topic.

The second point, for me much more interesting, is that CJEU decided that once a status as a family member of EU citizen according to EU 2004/38/EC is proven in one member state then a border guard is not allowed to question the status (unless there is an misuse or fraud).

From my experience, the police is very restrictive regarding Article 3/1 Beneficiaries of EU 2004/38/EC "a family member who is accompanying or joining the EU citizen".

Firstly, the police does not even know the EU law. Then, they demand an absolute proof of accompanying or joining according to Article 3/1.

Do I understand right that this police practise is over? The CJEU said clearly that a residence card according to Article 10 or 20 proves the status and police cannot further question it.

From Judgement:"In the light of the foregoing considerations, the answer to the third question must be that Article 20 of Directive 2004/38 must be interpreted as meaning that possession of the residence card referred to in that article constitutes sufficient proof that the holder of that card is a family member of a Union citizen, so that the person concerned is entitled, without further verification or justification being necessary, to enter the territory of a Member State exempt from the visa requirement under Article 5(2) of that Directive."

Does the Judgement mean that border guards are forbidden to further question a status of a family member of EU citizen according to EU 2004/38/EC if such family member identifies itself with a residence card according to Article 10 or 20 of EU 2004/38/EC?

Best Answer

I have read the decision a couple of times, although not very closely, and I do not think that it eliminates the possibility for border officers to seek to establish that the bearer of an Article 20 card (or an Article 10 card, for that matter) is traveling with or to join the EU family member.

That condition is more fundamental: it is established in Article 3(1), which provides that the directive applies to family members who "accompany or join" the Union citizen. If the family member is not accompanying or joining the Union citizen, the directive does not apply.

Unfortunately, that question seems not to have arisen in this case. Certainly, the court did not consider it. The most significant finding in this case is that an Article 20 card must be treated as equivalent to the purpose of an Article 10 card for the purpose of enabling the visa exemption. The directive is oddly ambiguous on that question: Article 5(2) establishes the visa exemption but mentions Article 10 only, which I presume was the result of a careless revision or some other drafting error.

Let us for the sake of argument assume a French person has moved to Ireland with a Senegalese spouse, who has obtained a residence card. There is certainly an argument to be made that the Senegalese spouse, having joined the French spouse in Ireland, is a beneficiary of the directive and should therefore be allowed to use that residence card to travel to any EU country without a visa. If this principle were firmly established, there would be no basis for questioning whether a third-country family member is joining the EU family member. However, I am not aware of that argument being made anywhere, so that practice will probably continue.

The UK certainly takes the opposite position, requiring the EU spouse to be in the UK or traveling with the third-country family member in order to qualify for a visa exemption.

Since the court did not consider this question directly, the ruling is not likely to have any impact on it.

Pictures about "Practical implication of Judgment in Case C-754/18 to family members of EU citizens according to EU 2004/38/EC [closed]"

Practical implication of Judgment in Case C-754/18 to family members of EU citizens according to EU 2004/38/EC [closed] - Six Assorted-color Flags Hanging on Gray Stainless Steel Poles

Practical implication of Judgment in Case C-754/18 to family members of EU citizens according to EU 2004/38/EC [closed] - Person Sitting Near Hanging Bottles and Opened Box

Practical implication of Judgment in Case C-754/18 to family members of EU citizens according to EU 2004/38/EC [closed] - Couple Reading Newspaper

Sources: Stack Exchange - This article follows the attribution requirements of Stack Exchange and is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.

Images: Andrea Piacquadio, Wikimedia Commons, Darya Sannikova, RODNAE Productions

Practical implication of Judgment in Case C-754/18 to family members of EU citizens according to EU 2004/38/EC [closed]

Best Answer

Pictures about "Practical implication of Judgment in Case C-754/18 to family members of EU citizens according to EU 2004/38/EC [closed]"

Related Topics