|
Publishers Abstract:
To understand the implications of Yunying Jia v. Migrationsverket it is necessary to cast an eye to the rights that third-country nationals have had up until now under European Community law. In 1968, migrant Community workers became entitled to be followed or joined by a certain group of close relatives, and it did not matter if they had non-EU nationality. Since then, the ambit of Union citizens entitled to free movement and family members allowed to follow or join them has been extended, culminating with the adoption of Directive 2004/38. The Advocate General proposed that the Court of Justice should interpret the relevant Directive as meaning that the right to permanent residence of third country family members 'presupposes' their lawful residence in the Community. The Court stated that the status of 'dependent' family member is a result of a factual situation characterized by the fact that material support for the individual is provided by the Community national who has exercised his right of free movement or by his spouse.
|
