Admission Procedures and Rights of TCNs in the EU: Problem - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Admission Procedures and Rights of TCNs in the EU: Problem - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Admission Procedures and Rights of TCNs in the EU: Problem Questions. Dr Diego Acosta Professor of European and Migration Law D.acosta@bristol.ac.uk Twitter @dacostalaw www.diegoacosta.eu Key questions Who is a TCN? Not and EU Citizen.
Key questions
- Who is a TCN? Not and EU Citizen.
- What are their different legal statuses in terms of
admission and rights?
– Different types of TCNS and different Directives.
- Nationality.
- Family relationship.
- Length of residence.
- Profession.
- Human Rights aspects.
2
So what do we have?
- Dir. 2004/38 EU citizens and family members in a
second MS.
- Dir. 2003/109 Long-Term Residence.
- Dir. 2003/86 Family Reunion.
- Dir. 2011/98 Single Permit.
- Dir. 2009/50 Highly Skilled Workers (re-negotiation).
- Dir. 2016/801 Researchers and Students.
- Dir. 2014/66 Intra Corporate Transferees.
- Dir. 2014/36 Seasonal Workers.
- Migrants in irregular situation.
15/06/2020
Also consider…
- International law Instruments (ECHR, etc…)
- EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (Articles 15,
30 and 31).
- EU Asylum Directives.
- Social Policy Directives (Art 153 TFEU). E.g.
Directive 2008/94 protection of employees in case of insolvency. Case C-311/13 Tümer.
- Agreements with third countries. E.g. EEA,
Switzerland, Turkey.
IRAC structure
- Issue. Who is the individual? Nationality,
family status, length of residence, profession, human rights aspects.
- Rule. What Directive or Directives need to be
used to solve his/her issue?
- Apply. By using case law when needed.
– https://www.ru.nl/law/cmr/documentation/cmr- newsletters/cjeu-overview/
- Conclusion.
First Case
- Susan is a US national. Her husband Michael is
also a US national residing in France with a long- term residence permit. Michael would like her wife to be reunited with him but the French authorities are asking him to prove that he has a flat in Paris of at least 60 square meters. The authorities have told him that this is in
- rder
to comfortably accommodate his wife once she arrives to France. Moreover, Michael is not sure on whether her wife will be able to start working once he moves with him to France. However, a friend has told him she will need to wait for a year before she obtains a work permit.
First Case
- Art. 4 (1) Dir. 2003/86
– 1. The Member States shall authorise the entry and residence, pursuant to this Directive and subject to compliance with the conditions laid down in Chapter IV, as well as in Article 16, of the following family members: (a) the sponsor´s spouse.
- Art. 7 (1)(a) Dir. 2003/86
– 1. When the application for family reunification is submitted, the Member State concerned may require the person who has submitted the application to provide evidence that the sponsor has: – (a) accommodation regarded as normal for a comparable family in the same region and which meets the general health and safety standards in force in the Member State concerned;
Case Chakroun C-578/08
- 43. Since authorisation of family reunification is the general
rule, the faculty provided for in Article 7(1)(c) of the Directive must be interpreted strictly. Furthermore, the margin for manoeuvre which the Member States are recognised as having must not be used by them in a manner which would undermine the objective of the Directive, which is to promote family reunification, and the effectiveness thereof.
– Also think about general principles of EU law, in particular, effectiveness and proportionality.
Wife´s work
- Article 14. Directive 2003/86
- 1. The sponsor's family members shall be entitled, in the
same way as the sponsor, to:
- (b) access to employment and self-employed activity;
- 2. Member States may decide according to national law the
conditions under which family members shall exercise an employed or self-employed activity. These conditions shall set a time limit which shall in no case exceed 12 months, during which Member States may examine the situation of their labour market before authorising family members to exercise an employed or self-employed activity.
Wife´s work
- Article 11. Directive 2003/109, Equal treatment.
- 1. Long-term residents shall enjoy equal treatment with
nationals as regards:
- (a) access to employment and self-employed activity,
provided such activities do not entail even occasional involvement in the exercise of public authority, and conditions of employment and working conditions, including conditions regarding dismissal and remuneration;
Second Case
- Denis is a Nigerian national. He works as a petroleum engineer at a
company in Madrid, Spain. His salary is 80,000 EUR after taxes per
- year. Another oil company based in Amsterdam, the Netherlands,
- ffers him a better package. However, Denis has only resided for 11
months in Spain and a colleague tells him that since he has not yet
- btained long term residence he will not be able to move to the
Netherlands unless he goes back to Nigeria first and applies for a residence permit at the Dutch consulate in Lagos. He is a bit uncertain about this advice. In fact, his friend Toby, also a petroleum engineer working for a Russian oil company, could directly move from the company’s office in Madrid to the ones in Amsterdam last year, without having to first go to Lagos.
- Moreover, Denis would like to bring his wife from Lagos but he is
told he would need to have resided for at least a year in Spain before he can start an application.
Second Case
- Is Denis a highly skilled worker?
– Art. 5(3) Dir. 2009/50: the gross annual salary resulting from the monthly or annual salary specified in the work contract or binding job offer shall not be inferior to a relevant salary threshold defined and published for that purpose by the Member States, which shall be at least 1,5 times the average gross annual salary in the Member State concerned. – Art. 2(g) ‘higher professional qualifications’ means qualifications attested by evidence of higher education qualifications or, by way of derogation, when provided for by national law, attested by at least five years of professional experience of a level comparable to higher education qualifications and which is relevant in the profession or sector specified in the work contract or binding job
- ffer;
Second Case
- Wife´s permit. Art. 15 Dir. 2009/50:
- 1.
Directive 2003/86/EC shall apply with the derogations laid down in this Article.
- 2.
By way of derogation from Articles 3(1) and 8 of Directive 2003/86/EC, family reunification shall not be made dependent on the requirement of the EU Blue Card holder having reasonable prospects
- f obtaining the right of permanent residence and having a minimum
period of residence.
Second Case
- Second MS:
- Art. 18 Dir. 2009/50.
- CHAPT
PTER V
- RESIDE
DENC NCE IN IN OTHER MEMBER STATES TES
- Article 18
- Condi
ditions
- ns
- 1. After eighteen months of legal residence in the first Member State
as an EU Blue Card holder, the person concerned and his family members may move to a Member State other than the first Member State for the purpose of highly qualified employment under the conditions set out in this Article.
- What about Toby, how is it possible he could move last year?
Second Case
- Dir. 2014/66, Art. 22. Intra-Corporate Transferees.
- Article 22
- Long-te
term rm mobility ty
- 1.
In relation to third-country nationals who hold a valid intra-corporate transferee permit issued by the first Member State and who intend to stay in any second Member State and work in any other entity, established in the latter and belonging to the same undertaking or group of undertakings, for more than 90 days per Member State, the second Member State may decide to:
- (a)
- apply Article 21 and allow the intra-corporate transferee to stay and work on its
territory on the basis of and during the period of validity of the intra-corporate transferee permit issued by the first Member State; or
- (b)
- apply the procedure provided for in paragraphs 2 to 7.
Second Case
- Dir. 2014/66, Art. 22. Intra-Corporate Transferees.
- Article 22
- Long-te
term rm mobility ty
- 1.
In relation to third-country nationals who hold a valid intra-corporate transferee permit issued by the first Member State and who intend to stay in any second Member State and work in any other entity, established in the latter and belonging to the same undertaking or group of undertakings, for more than 90 days per Member State, the second Member State may decide to:
- (a)
- apply Article 21 and allow the intra-corporate transferee to stay and work on its
territory on the basis of and during the period of validity of the intra-corporate transferee permit issued by the first Member State; or
- (b)
- apply the procedure provided for in paragraphs 2 to 7.
Third Case
- Carlos is an Argentinean national who has resided for 6 years in
- Hungary. Despite the fact that his grandfather was a Hungarian
national who emigrated to Argentina in the 1940s, he does not have Hungarian citizenship. He holds however a long-term residence
- permit. Carlos has now completed his degree at the University of
Budapest on dentistry. However, in accordance with domestic law,
- nly a person who fulfils, inter alia, the requirement of being a
national of a State which is part of the Agreement on the European Economic Area may be a member of the College of Dentists. His application to join the College has thus been rejected and he is unable practice his profession and open a dental clinic since it is necessary to be a member of the College of Dentists in order to exercise the profession of dentist whether on an employed or self-employed basis. To make matters worse, Carlos has received two speeding tickets in the last month and the authorities have sent him a letter asking him to leave the country.
Third Case
- Work. Directive 2003/109.
- Article 11. Equal treatment
- 1. Long-term residents shall enjoy equal treatment with nationals as regards:
- (a) access to employment and self-employed activity, provided such activities do
not entail even occasional involvement in the exercise of public authority, and conditions of employment and working conditions, including conditions regarding dismissal and remuneration;
- Case Commission v. Hungary C-761/19.
Third Case
- Expulsion. Art. 12, Directive 2003/109. Protection against expulsion
- 1. Member States may take a decision to expel a long-term resident solely where he/she
constitutes an actual and sufficiently serious threat to public policy or public security.
- 2. The decision referred to in paragraph 1 shall not be founded on economic
considerations.
- 3. Before taking a decision to expel a long-term resident, Member States shall have regard
to the following factors:
- (a) the duration of residence in their territory;
- (b) the age of the person concerned;
- (c) the consequences for the person concerned and family members;
- (d) links with the country of residence or the absence of links with the country of origin.
- Case López Pastuzano, C-636/16. Para 27: Moreover, the Court has already pointed out
in its judgment of 8 December 2011, Ziebell (C-371/08, paras 82 and 83), that the adoption of such a measure may not be ordered automatically following a criminal conviction, but rather requires a case-by-case assessment which must, in particular, have regard to the elements mentioned in Article 12(3) of Directive 2003/109.
Fourth Case
- Nurali is a national from Kazakhstan who resides in Berlin,
- Germany. He held a single permit working as a Russian teacher
for a year but in January 2019 he received a written notification saying his application for renewal had been rejected and that he should leave the country. He did not receive any reasons for such rejection. He remains in Germany living with his fiancée, a Czech national, and they get married in May 2019. In June 2019 his application for a residence permit as a family member
- f an EU citizen is rejected. He is informed he is a migrant in
an irregular situation and is offered a week to leave Germany.
Fourth Case
- Directive 2011/98, Article 8
- Proce
cedural dural guaran rantee ees
- 1.
Reasons shall be given in the written notification of a decision rejecting an application to issue, amend or renew a single permit, or a decision withdrawing a single permit on the basis of criteria provided for by Union or national law.
- 2.
A decision rejecting the application to issue, amend or renew or withdrawing a single permit shall be open to legal challenge in the Member State concerned, in accordance with national law. The written notification referred to in paragraph 1 shall specify the court
- r administrative authority where the person concerned may lodge an
appeal and the time limit therefor.
Fourth Case
- Directive 2004/38. Article 2. Definition
- ions. For the purposes of this Directive:
- 2) "Family member" means:
- (a) the spouse;
- Article 7
- Right of
- f reside
dence nce for more than three months hs
- 1. All Union citizens shall have the right of residence on the territory of another Member State
for a period of longer than three months if they:
- (a) are workers or self-employed persons in the host Member State; or
- (b)have sufficient resources for themselves and their family members…and have comprehensive
sickness insurance cover in the host Member State; or
- C. are enrolled at a private or public establishment to study and have sufficient resources and
sickness insurance.
- (d) are family members accompanying or joining a Union citizen who satisfies the conditions
referred to in points (a), (b) or (c).
- 2.
The right of residence provided for in paragraph 1 shall extend to family members who are not nationals of a Member State, accompanying or joining the Union citizen in the host Member State, provided that such Union citizen satisfies the conditions referred to in paragraph l(a), (b) or (c).
Fourth Case
- Case Metock. C-127/08.
- 99. The answer to the second question must therefore be
that Article 3(1) of Directive 2004/38 must be interpreted as meaning that a national of a non-member country who is the spouse of a Union citizen residing in a Member State whose nationality he does not possess and who accompanies or joins that Union citizen benefits from the provisions of that directive, irrespective of when and where their marriage took place and of how the national
- f a non-member country entered the host Member