|
Publishers Abstract:
With the benefit of hindsight, when the Court ruled in Gravier that migrant and non-migrant students should be charged the same fees for higher education, and in Raulin that they should enjoy equal access to any assistance provided to cover those costs, it was only a matter of time before the Court would rule that migrants lawfully resident in a Member State should be treated in the same way as nationals in respect of access to maintenance grants and loans. Dany Bidar, a French national, joins the ever expanding line of cases in which the Court makes clear that Community law does not benefit only the economically active migrant. Since the introduction of the status of Union citizenship, the Court has been prepared to recognize that migrants who are not economically active but lawfully resident now enjoy entitlement to certain benefits under the same terms as nationals. And since it is perceived that they contribute to the economy of the host State, the Court does not have to work hard to justify their equality of treatment.
|
