Assessing the consistency of EU development cooperation with readmission in the EU-Philippines Agreement Case – a balancing exercise

Publishers Abstract
In Case C-377/12, the Court of Justice had to rule on a dispute between the Commission and the Council regarding the definition of the legal bases for the signing and conclusion of the Framework Agreement with the Philippines.

The dispute focused particularly on the provisions dealing with readmission, environment and transport. Applying its traditional case law ( Portugal v Council ), the Court ruled that the Framework Agreement was a development agreement. Further, the provisions that had led to the addition of legal bases by the Council were part of development co-operation and had to be based on art.209 TFEU.

While the Court easily reached this conclusion with regard to environment and transport, its reasoning was more questionable regarding readmission, as it required assessing the consistency between the EU’s development and migration policies.

This decision was sensitive, especially because of the 'variable geometry' existing within the area of freedom, security and justice, and in particular migration.

• Primary Source

Sweet and Maxwell: European Law Review http://www.sweetandmaxwell.co.uk/catalogue/productdetails.aspx?recordid=427&productid=6968

ESO Background information: Is readmission linked to development? http://www.europeansources.info/record/is-readmission-linked-to-development/

ESO: Background information: Demarcating the Union’s Development Cooperation Policy after Lisbon: Commission v. Council (Philippines PCFA) http://www.europeansources.info/record/demarcating-the-unions-development-cooperation-policy-after-lisbon-commission-v-council-philippines-pcfa/

---