Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T00:14:02.151Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Free Movement: The Workseeker as Citizen

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2017

Michael Dougan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This article is concerned with the legal position of Community nationals who move to another Member State in search of employment. Section II will summarise the traditional legal status of the workseeker viewed as an economic factor of production. Section III will explore the new legal status of the workseeker viewed as a citizen of the European Union. Section IV will offer some brief comments on the Commission’s 2001 proposal for an umbrella directive on free movement for Union citizens, and its implications for the migrant workseeker. It will be argued, through this analysis, that the institution of Union citizenship, so often criticised for its ‘us and them’ mentality in the treatment of third country nationals, is equally characterised by a ‘haves and have-nots’ approach to its own members—thus presenting a model which (albeit for perhaps understandable pragmatic reasons) is not necessarily in the best interests of maximising economic efficiency within the Common Market, places limits on certain of the political aspirations vested in the process of European integration, and questions the depth or at least the methodology of the Community’s stated commitment to attaining high levels of social protection.

Type
Research Article
Information
Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies , Volume 4 , 2001 , pp. 93 - 132
Copyright
Copyright © Centre for European Legal Studies, Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Art. 7 Dir. 68/360, OJ 1968 L 257/13 makes limited provision for individuals who become unemployed within the host state, then begin to search for work. The Council, when adopting Dir. 68/360, understood that workseekers should in practice be granted limited permission to reside in other Member States: ter Heide, H. ‘The Free Movement of Workers in the Final Phase’ (1968-1969) 6 CMLRev 466 Google Scholar, 476.

2 Case 48/75 Royer [1976] ECR 497, para 31; Case 53/81 Levin [1982] ECR 1035, para 17.

3 Case C–292/89 Antonissen [1991] ECR I–745.

4 Case C–344/95 Commission v. Belgium [1997] ECR I–1035; Case C–292/89 Antonissen [1991] ECR I–745.

5 E.g. Case C–171/95 Tetik [1997] ECR I–341.

6 Case C–292/89 Antonissen [1991] ECR I–745.

7 E.g. Case C-171/91 Tsiotras [1993] ECR I–2925.

8 Art. 4 Dir. 68/360. Cf. Commission proposal, COM(98) 394 Final.

9 Art. 10 Reg. 1612/68, OJ 1968 L 257/2. Cp. Commission proposal, COM(98) 394 Final.

10 E.g. Case 167/73 Commission v. France [1974] ECR 359.

11 E.g. Case 379/87 Groener [1989] ECR 3967; Case C–281/98 Angonese [2000] ECR I–4139.

12 Case 316/85 Lebon [1987] ECR 2811.

13 E.g. Case 207/78 Even [1979] ECR 2019.

14 Case 65/81 Reina [1982] ECR 33; Case 59/85 Netherlands v. Reed [1986] ECR 1283.

15 Case 32/75 Cristini [1975] ECR 1085; Case 137/84 Mutsch [1985] ECR 2681.

16 Also: AG Lenz in Case 316/85 Lebon [1987] ECR 2811, paras 48 to 51 Opinion.

17 E.g. Case 63/76 Inzirillo [1976] ECR 2057; Case C–310/91 Schmid [1993] ECR I–3011.

18 E.g. Case 261/83 Castelli [1984] ECR 3199; Case 157/84 Frascogna [1985] ECR 1739.

19 Case 249/83 Hoeckx [1985] ECR 973; Case 122/84 Scrivner and Cole [1985] ECR 1027. Other examples: Case C–111/91 Commission v. Luxembourg [1993] ECR I–817 (childbirth/maternity allowances); Case C–185/96 Commission v. Greece [1998] ECR I–6601 (large family allowances); Case C–237/94 O’Flynn [1996] ECR I–2617 (funeral expenses); Case 94/84 Deak [1985] ECR 1873 and Case C–278/94 Commission v. Belgium [1996] ECR I–4307 (special unemployment benefits for young people).

20 E.g. Commission proposal for a directive on a right of residence for nationals of Member States in the territory of another Member State, COM(1980) 358 Final, 3; Reports from the ad hoc Committee on A People’s Europe’ EC Bull Supp 7/85, 14.

21 Case C–85/96 María Martínez Sala [1998] ECR I–2691, paras 32 and 58. Also: Case C–389/99 Rundgren (Judgment of 10 May 2001), para 32; Case C–43/99 Leclere (Judgment of 31 May 2001), para 55. Further: O’Leary, S. ‘Putting Flesh on the Bones of European Union Citizenship’ (1999) 24 ELRev 68 Google Scholar.

22 E.g. Case 39/86 Lair [1988] ECR 3161; Case C–57/96 Meints [1997] ECR I–6689.

23 Case C–90/97 Swaddling [1999] ECR I–1075, para 24 Opinion. Cf. Case C-278/94 Commission v. Belgium [1996] ECR I–4307; English Court of Appeal in R v. Secretary of State for Social Security, ex parte Sarwar and Getachew [1997] 3 CMLR 648; Hervey, T. European Social Law and Policy (London, Longman, 1998)Google Scholar Ch. 5.

24 Last consolidated text published at OJ 1997 L 28/1; more recent consolidated text available at www.europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/consleg/index1.html. Further: White, R. EC Social Security Law (London, Longman, 1999)Google Scholar; Pennings, F Introduction to European Social Security Law (The Hague, Kluwer, 2001)Google Scholar.

25 E.g. Case T–66/95 Kuchlenz-Winter v. Commission [1997] ECR II–637; Case C–411/98 Ferlini [2000] ECR I–8081.

26 E.g. Case 66/77 Kuyken [1977] ECR 2311; though see now Reg. 307/99, OJ 1999 L 38/1.

27 Art. 4(1). E.g. Case 249/83 Hoeckx [1985] ECR 973.

28 Art. 4(4); Case 79/76 Fossi [1977] ECR 667. Cf. hybrid benefits as recognised, e.g. in Case 1/72 Frilli [1972] ECR 457.

29 Further: Wikeley, N. ‘Migrant Workers and Unemployment Benefit in the European Community’ [1988] JSWL 300 Google Scholar.

30 Art. 67. E.g. Case C–62/91 Gray [1992] ECR I–2737. Note: exceptions under Art. 71, e.g. Case 76/76 Di Paolo [1977] ECR 315; Case C–102/91 Knoch [1992] ECR I–4341.

31 E.g. Case C–277/99 Kaske (Judgment of 5 February 2002).

32 Art. 69. E.g. Case C–215/00 Rydergård (Judgment of 21 February 2002). Cf. Case 27/75 Bonaffini [1975] ECR 971.

33 E.g. Case 41/79 Testa [1980] ECR 1979.

34 E.g. Case 139/78 Coccioli [1979] ECR 991.

35 E.g. Case 40/76 Kermaschek [1976] ECR 1669; Case C–308/93 Cabanis-lssarte [1996] ECR I–2097; Case C–189/00 Ruhr (Judgment of 25 October 2001).

36 Art. 4(2a).

37 Art. 10a. Such benefits must be listed in Annex IIa, though this is not in itself conclusive of their proper classification: Case C–215/99 Jauch (Judgment of 8 March 2001); Case C-43/99 Leclere (Judgment of 31 May 2001).

38 Art. 3.

39 Case C–90/97 Swaddling [1999] ECR I–1075.

40 E.g. Case 53/81 Levin [1982] ECR 1035; Case 66/85 Lawrie-Blum [1986] ECR 2121. Provided the claimant is performing effective and genuine economic services, e.g. Case 196/87 Steymann [1988] ECR 6159; Case 344/87 Bettray [1989] ECR 1621; Case C–357/89 Raulin [1992] ECR I–1027; Case C–3/90 Bernini [1992] ECR I–1071.

41 Case 139/85 Kempf [1986] ECR 1741.

42 Art. 49 EC service providers / recipients are also entitled to equal treatment within the host state as regards social advantages chargeable to public funds, e.g. Case 63/86 Commission v. Italy [1988] ECR 29; Case 186/87 Cowan v. Trésor public [1989] ECR 195. But it seems unlikely that workseekers could rely on Art. 49 qua service recipients to claim equal access to social benefits, since their residence is indefinite / possibly permanent; cf. Case C–70/95 Sodemare [1997] ECR I–3395.

43 Case 32/75 Cristini [1975] ECR 1085; Case 137/84 Mutsch [1985] ECR 2681; Case 186/87 Cowan v. Trésor public [1989] ECR 195; Case C–45/93 Commission v. Spain [1994] ECR I–911 (respectively).

44 Clasen, J. ‘Beyond Social Security: the Economic Value of Giving Money to Unemployed People’ (1999) 1 EJSS 151 Google Scholar.

45 Cf.Watson, P. ‘Free movement of workers and social security’ (1981) 6 ELRev 290 Google Scholar. Also: Art. 2 EC, i.e. the Community’s tasks include promoting ‘a high level of employment’. In addition: Title VIII on Employment, particularly Art. 127(2) EC, i.e. the objective of a high level of employment shall be taken into consideration in the formulation and implementation of Community policies and activities. Further: Commission, Action Plan for Skills and Mobility, COM(2002) 72.

46 Barnard, C. Deakin, S. and Hobbs, R. ‘Capabilities and Rights: an Emerging Agenda for Social Policy?’ (2001) 32 IRJ 464 Google Scholar.

47 E.g. Presidency Conclusions of the Lisbon European Council (23–24 March 2000), and the Nice European Council (7–9 December 2000). Also: Commission, Social Policy Agenda, COM (2000) 379.

48 Case 139/85 Kempf [1986] ECR 1741.

49 Case C–357/89 Raulin [1992] ECR I–1027.

50 Dir. 93/96, OJ 1993 L 317/59; Dir. 90/365, OJ 1990 L 180/28; Dir. 90/364, OJ 1990 L 180/26.

51 Extensive studies: Hall, S. Nationality, Migration Rights and Citizenship of the Union (Dordrecht, Martinus Nijhoff, 1995)Google Scholar; O’Leary, S. The Evolving Concept of Community Citizenship: From the Free Movement of Persons to Union Citizenship (Dordrecht, Kluwer Law, 1996)Google Scholar. More generally: Closa, C. ‘The Concept of Citizenship in the Treaty on European Union’ (1992) 29 CMLRev 1137 Google Scholar; O’Keeffe, D. ‘Union Citizenship’ in O’Keeffe, D. and Twomey, P. (eds.) Legal Issues of the Maastricht Treaty (Chichester, Wiley, 1994)Google Scholar; d’Oliveira, H.U.J. ‘European Citizenship: Its Meaning, Its Potential’ in Dehousse, R. (ed.) Europe After Maastricht: An Ever Closer Union? (Munich, Law Books in Europe, 1994)Google Scholar.

52 Also: Arts. 45(1) and 52(2) EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, OJ 2000 C 364/1.

53 Case C–43/95 Data Delecta [1996] ECR I–4661, para 16.

54 Further: Lenaerts, K. ‘L’Égalité de Traitement en Droit Communautaire: Un Principe Unique Aux Apparences Multiples’ [1991] CDE 3 Google Scholar; de Búrca, G. ‘The Role of Equality in European Community Law’ in Dashwood, A. and O’Leary, S. (eds.) The Principle of Equal Treatment in EC Law (London, Sweet & Maxwell, 1997)Google Scholar; More, G. ‘The Principle of Equal Treatment: From Market Unifier to Fundamental Right?’ in Craig, P. and de Búrca, G. (eds.) The Evolution of EU Law (Oxford, OUP, 1999)Google Scholar.

55 Case C–13/94 P v. S and Cornwall County Council [1996] ECR I–2143, para 18. Also: AG Elmer in Case C–249/96 Grant v. South West Trains [1998] ECR I–621, para 42 Opinion. Cp. Cases C–270–271/97 Sievers [2000] ECR I–929.

56 Cases C–4–5/95 Stöber and Pereira [1997] ECR I–511, para 50 Opinion.

57 Case C–214/94 Boukhalfa [1996] ECR I–2253, para 63 Opinion. Also: AG Jacobs in Case C–274/96 Bickel and Franz [1998] ECR I–7637.

58 Further: Preuβ, U. ‘Problems of a Concept of European Citizenship’ (1995) 1 ELJ 267 Google Scholar; Wiener, A. and della Sala, V. ‘Constitution-Making and Citizenship Practice: Bridging the Democracy Gap in the EU?’ (1997) 35 JCMS 595 Google Scholar; Shaw, J. ‘The Interpretation of European Union Citizenship’ (1998) 61 MLR 293 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Cf. Commission, European Governance: A White Paper, COM(2001) 428 Final.

59 Further: Everson, M. ‘The Legacy of the Market Citizen’ in Shaw, J. and More, G. (eds.) New Legal Dynamics of European Union (Oxford, Clarendon, 1995)Google Scholar.

60 E.g. O’Keeffe, D. and Horspool, M. ‘European Citizenship and the Free Movement of Persons’ (1996) XXXI The Irish Jurist 145 Google Scholar.

61 Cases C–65 and 111/95 Shingara [1997] ECR I–3343, para 34 Opinion. Also: AG Cosmas in Case C–378/97 Wijsenbeek [1999] ECR I–6207.

62 Cp. Art. 136 EC (proper social protection and combating exclusion).

63 Art. 34 Charter of Fundamental Rights. The full extent of these rights is determined by ref erence to Community and national law.

64 Arts. 149(4) and 152(4) EC. Note: Case C–376/98 Germany v. Parliament and Council [2000] ECR I–8419.

65 Further: Dougan, M. ‘Minimum Harmonisation and the Internal Market’ (2000) 37 CMLRev 853 Google Scholar.

66 E.g. Case 41/84 Pinna [1986] ECR 1. Consider also: Dir. 98/49 on safeguarding the supplementary pension rights of employed and self-employed persons moving within the Community, OJ 1998 L 209/46.

67 E.g. Case C–302/98 Sehrer [2000] ECR I–4585; Case C–262/97 Engelbrecht [2000] ECR I–7321; Case C–157/99 Peerbooms (Judgment of 12 July 2001). Note also: legislation outlawing other forms of discrimination as regards social security, e.g. Dir. 79/7 on the progressive imple mentation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security, OJ 1979 L 6/24.

68 Further: Laske, C. ‘The Impact of the Single European Market on Social Protection For Migrant Workers’ (1993) 30 CMLRev 515 Google Scholar.

69 E.g. Council Rec. 92/441 on common criteria concerning sufficient resources and social assistance, OJ 1992 L 245/46; Council Rec. 92/442 on the convergence of objectives and policies in the area of social protection, OJ 1992 L 245/49. More recently and in light of Art. 137 EC (introduced at Amsterdam), e.g. Presidency Conclusions of the Lisbon European Council (23–24 March 2000), and of the Nice European Council (7–9 December 2000); Dec. 50/2002 establishing a programme of Community action to encourage cooperation between Member States to combat social exclu sion, OJ 2002 L 10/01. Nice would further facilitate such inter-state cooperation, e.g. by recognis ing under Art. 137 EC express Community competence to support and complement Member State activities as regards combating social exclusion and modernising social protection.

70 Further: Majone, G. ‘The European Community Between Social Policy and Social Regulation’ (1993) 31 JCMS 153 Google Scholar; Leibfried, S. and Pierson, P. ‘Social Policy: Left to Courts and Markets?’ in Wallace, H. and Wallace, W (eds.) Policy-Making in the European Union 4th edn. (Oxford, OUP, 2000)Google Scholar; Faist, T. ‘Social Citizenship in the European Union: Nested Membership’ (2001) 39 JCMS 37 Google Scholar.

71 Cases C–92 and 326/92 Phil Collins [1993] ECR I–5145, para 11 Opinion. Also: Case C–274/96 Bickel and Franz [1998] ECR I–7637, paras 23 to 24 Opinion.

72 E.g. Tomuschat, C. note on the Sala Case (above n 21) (2000) 37 CMLRev 449 Google Scholar. Cf.Steiner, J. ‘The Right to Welfare: Equality and Equity Under Community Law’ (1985) 10 ELRev 21 Google Scholar.

73 Further: Reich, N. ‘Competition Between Legal Orders: A New Paradigm of EC Law?’ (1992) 29 CMLRev 861 Google Scholar.

74 Further: Van den Bergh, R. ‘Subsidiarity as an Economic Demarcation Principle and the Emergence of European Private Law’ (1998) 5 MJ 129 Google Scholar.

75 Further: Deakin, S. and Wilkinson, F. ‘Rights vs. Efficiency? The Economic Case for Transnational Labour Standards’ (1994) 23 ILJ 289 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

76 E.g. Fries, S. and Shaw, J. ‘Citizenship of the Union: First Steps in the European Court of Justice’ (1998) 4 EPL 533 Google Scholar; Douglas-Scott, S. ‘In Search of Union Citizenship’ (1998) 18 YEL 29 Google Scholar.

77 Contrast: Editorial Comments, ‘Are European Values Being Hoovered Away?’ (1993) 30 CMLRev 445; with Barnard, C. ‘Social Dumping and the Race to the Bottom: Some Lessons For the European Union From Delaware?’ (2000) 25 ELRev 57 Google Scholar. Also: Case C–212/97 Centros [1999] ECR I–1459; discussed by Deakin, S. ‘Regulatory Competition Versus Harmonisation in European Company Law’ in Esty, D and Geradin, D. (eds.) Regulatory Competition and Economic Integration: Comparative Perspectives (Oxford, OUP, 2001)Google Scholar.

78 Commission, Action Plan for Skills and Mobility, COM(2002) 72. Further: O’Leary, S. ‘The Free Movement of Persons and Services’ in Craig and de Búrca, above n 54. The referee for this paper drew attention to additional disincentives for the supposed welfare tourist, e.g. the expense of moving itself, the likely higher cost of day-to-day living in Member States with higher welfare benefits, and the loss of networks of family / friends who often provide benefits in kind (free accom modation, childcare etc).

79 This is the standard rate payable to single persons aged 25 years and over, with no children or relevant illness / disability, applicable since April 2001.

80 Commission, The Free Movement of Workers in the Context of Enlargement, Information Note: 6 March 2001; Press Release IP/01/561 of 11 April 2001.

81 Consider, e.g. English Court of Appeal in R v. Secretary of State for Social Security, ex parte Sarwar and Getachew [1997] 3 CMLR 648.

82 E.g. Case 60/86 Commission v. United Kingdom [1988] ECR 3921; Case C–215/97 Bellone [1998] ECR I–2191.

83 Deakin, S. ‘Two Types of Regulatory Competition: Competitive Federalism Versus Reflexive Harmonisation. A Law and Economics Perspective on Centros ’ (1999) 2 CYELS 231 Google Scholar; Barnard, C. and Deakin, S. ‘Market Access and Regulatory Competition’ in Barnard, C. and Scott, J. (eds.) The Law of the Single European Market: Unpacking the Premises (Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2002)Google Scholar.

84 Further: Pelkmans, J. and Sun, J.M. ‘Regulatory Competition in the Single Market’ (1995) 33 JCMS 67 Google Scholar; Esty, D. and Geradin, D. ‘Regulatory Co-opetition’ in Esty and Geradin, above n 77.

85 Cf. Case C–262/88 Barber [1990] ECR I–1889; Protocol concerning Art. 141 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (the ‘Barber Protocol’ agreed at Maastricht).

86 E.g. Wilkinson, B. ‘Towards European Citizenship? Nationality, Discrimination and Free Movement of Workers in the European Union’ (1995) 1 EPL 417 Google Scholar.

87 Case C–356/98 Kaba [2000] ECR I–2623, paras 51 to 61 Opinion. Also: AG Geelhoed in Case C–413/99 Baumbast (Opinion of 5 July 2001; Judgment pending). Further: Report of the High Level Panel on the free movement of persons chaired by Mrs Simone Veil (presented to Commission on 18 March 1997).

88 Case T–66/95 Kuchlenz-Winter v. Commission [1997] ECR II–637.

89 Phull v. Home Secretary [1996] Imm AR 72; Mouncife v. Home Secretary [1996] Imm AR 265.

90 E.g. Case C–193/94 Stanavi [1996] ECR I–929; Cases C–4–5/95 Stöber and Pereira [1997] ECR I–511; Case C–299/95 Kremzow [1997] ECR I–2629. Similarly in later cases, e.g. Case C–348/96 Caifa [1999] ECR I–11; Case C–378/97 Wijsenbeek [1999] ECR I–6207; Case C–192/99 Kaur (Judgment of 20 February 2001); Case C–100/01 Olazabal (Opinion of 25 April 2002; Judgment pending). Further: Reich, N. ‘Union Citizenship: Metaphor or Source of Rights?’ (2001) 7 ELJ 4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

91 Case C–184/99 Grzelczyk (Judgment of 20 September 2001).

92 Ibid. para 31.

93 Case C–356/98 Kaba [2000] ECR I–2623, para 30. Note Case C-66/00 Kaba II (pending).

94 Case C–378/97 Wijsenbeek [1999] ECR I–6207.

95 Cases C– 65 and 111/95 Shingara [1997] ECR I–3343; Case C– 348/96 Caifa [1999] ECR I–11; Case C– 357/98 Yiadom [2000] ECR I–9265.

96 Case C– 96/95 Commission v. Germany [1997] ECR I–1653; Case C-24/98 Commission v. Italy [2000] ECR I–4001.

97 Case C–20/96 Snares [1997] ECR I–6057, para 50.

98 AG Alber in Case C–184/99 Grzelczyk (Opinion of 28 September 2000), paras 119 to 125.

99 E.g. Case 48/75 Royer [1976] ECR 497; Case C–85/96 María Martínez Sala [1998] ECR I–2691; Case C–459/99 MRAX (Judgment of 25 July 2002).

100 The precise timing / mechanism of the Member State’s permitted response remains uncertain. As regards Dirs. 90/364 and 90/365, the Member State may require revalidation of the residence permit after the first two years of residence, and thereafter its renewal every five years. It has not yet been clarified by the Court whether Union citizens governed by these measures and who become ‘unreasonable financial burdens’ whilst in possession of a valid residence permit can have this document revoked / their right to residency terminated even before the date for its next renewal. As regards Dir. 93/96, the Member State may limit the validity of the student’s residence permit to either the duration of the course (in the case of short periods of study), or one year (renewable annually for the duration of longer courses). In this situation, the host state might in practice have insufficient time to act against students who become ‘unreasonable financial burdens’, before their residency rights for study purposes would have expired anyway: Lhernould, J.P. ‘L’accès aux prestations sociales des citoyens de l’Union européenne’ [2001] Droit Social 1103.

101 Case C–413/99 Baumbast (Opinion of 05 July 2001; Judgment pending).

102 Case C–357/98 Yiadom [2000] ECR I–9265. Compare Toner, H. ‘Judicial Interpretation of European Union Citizenship: Transformation or Consolidation?’ (2000) 7 MJ 158 Google Scholar.

103 Case C–135/99 Elsen (Judgment of 23 November 2000). Also: Case C–28/00 Kauer (Judgment of 7 February 2002); cf. AG Alber in Case C–255/99 Humer (Opinion of 8 February 2001; Judgment of 5 February 2002). Cf. Case C–18/95 Terhoeve [1999] ECR I–345.

104 Cf. AG La Pergola in Case C–356/98 Kaba [2000] ECR I–2623, para 57 Opinion. Also: English Court of Appeal in R v. Home Secretary, ex parte Vitale [1996] 2 CMLR 587.

105 Case C–85/96 María Martínez Sala [1998] ECR I–2691; Tomuschat, C. (2000) 37 CMLRev 449 Google Scholar.

106 Case C–274/96 Bickel and Franz [1998] ECR I–7637; Bulterman, M. (1999) 361 CMLRev 1325 Google Scholar.

107 Cp. Weatherill, S. and Beaumont, P. EU Law 3rd edn (London, Penguin, 1999), 664-67Google Scholar; Lhernould, above n 100, 1106–1107.

108 Case C–411/98 Ferlini [2000] ECR I–8081. Cp. Case C–415/93 Bosman [1995] ECR I–4921. Note also the possibility of wider horizontal application after Case C–281/98 Angonese [2000] ECR I–4139; compare AG Cosmas in Case C–411/98 Ferlini [2000] ECR I–8081, paras 71 to 79 Opinion.

109 Cf. AG Cosmas in Case C–411/98 Ferlini [2000] ECR I–8081, para 68 Opinion.

110 Cf. AG La Pergola in Case C–356/98 Kaba [2000] ECR I–2623, para 54 Opinion.

111 Further: O’Keeffe and Horspool, above n 60; O’Leary, S. ‘The Principle of Equal Treatment on Grounds of Nationality in Art. 6 EC: A Lucrative Source of Rights for Member State Nationals?’ in Dashwood and O’Leary, above n 54.

112 Further: Vincenzi, C. ‘European Citizenship and Free Movement Rights in the United Kingdom’ [1995] PL 259 Google Scholar; Fries and Shaw, above n 76. Consider, e.g. R v. City of Westminster, ex parte Castelli (1996) 28 HLR 616; Remilien and Wolke [1998] 1 All ER 129.

113 Cases C–64–65/96 Uecker and Jacquet [1997] ECR I–3171. Cf. Cases 35–36/82 Morson and Jhanjan [1982] ECR 3723. Cf. Case C-60/00 Carpenter (Opinion of 13 September 2001; Judgment of 11 July 2002).

114 E.g. Case C–20/92 Hubbard [1993] ECR I–3777; Case C–193/94 Skanavi [1996] ECR I–929. The Court has sometimes been less dogmatic about the application of Art. 12 EC vis-à-vis more specific Treaty provisions laying down identical rules on nationality discrimination, e.g. Case C–398/92 Mund & Fester [1994] ECR I–467; Case C–43/95 Data Delecta [1996] ECR I–4661.

115 E.g. Case 36/75 Rutili [1975] ECR 1219. Compare AG Jacobs in Cases C–92 and 326/92 Phil Collins [1993] ECR I–5145, paras 12 to 13 Opinion; AG La Pergola in Case C–43/95 Data Delecta [1996] ECR I–4661, para 12 Opinion.

116 E.g. Case C–114/97 Commission v. Spain [1998] ECR I–6717; Case C–355/98 Commission v. Belgium [2000] ECR I–1221; Case C–283/99 Commission v. Italy (Judgment of 31 May 2001). Also: AG La Pergola in Case C–85/96 María Martínez Sala [1998] ECR I–2691, para 21 Opinion; Case C–356/98 Kaba [2000] ECR I–2623, para 54 Opinion. Cf. the situation as regards political rights: Evans, A. ‘Union Citizenship and the Constitutionalisation of Equality in EU Law’ in La Torre, M. (ed.) European Citizenship: An Institutional Challenge (The Hague, Kluwer, 1998)Google Scholar.

117 Case 39/86 Lair [1988] ECR 3161; Case 197/86 Brown [1988] ECR 3205. Also: Case C–357/89 Raulin [1992] ECR I–1027. Further: Case 152/82 Forcheri [1983] ECR 2323; Case 293/83 Gravier [1985] ECR 593; Case 24/86 Blaizot [1988] ECR 379.

118 E.g. Arnull, A. Dashwood, A. Ross, M. and Wyatt, D. Wyatt and Dashwood’s European Union Law 4th edn (London, Sweet & Maxwell, 2000)Google Scholar Ch. 28.

119 Further: Lenaerts, K. ‘Education in European Community Law After Maastricht’ (1994) 31 CMLRev 7 Google Scholar; Shaw, J. ‘From the Margins to the Centre: Education and Training Law and Policy’ in Craig and de Búrca, above n 54.

120 Also: AG Alber in Case C–184/99 Grzelczyk (Opinion of 28 September 2000), paras 110 to 111.

121 Case C–378/97 Wijsenbeek [1999] ECR I–6207, paras 86 and 97 to 116 Opinion. Similarly: AG Geelhoed in Case C-413/99 Baumbast (Judgment pending), para 110 Opinion of 5 July 2001.

121 122 Art. 43, e.g. Case 197/84 Steinhauser v. City of Biarritz [1985] ECR 1819; Case C–168/91 Konstantinidis [1993] ECR I–1191; Case C–337/97 Meeusen [1999] ECR I–3289. Art. 49, e.g. Case 63/86 Commission v. Italy [1988] ECR 29; Case 186/87 Cowan v. Trésor public [1989] ECR 195; Case C–45/93 Commission v. Spain [1994] ECR I–911. In particular: Case C–274/96 Bickel and Franz [1998] ECR I–7637.

123 E.g. Case 15/69 Ugliola [1969] ECR 363. However, consider the critique by AG Jacobs in Case C–136/00 Danner (Opinion of 21 March 2002; Judgment pending). Further: Case C–20/92 Hubbard [1993] ECR I–3777; Case C-43/95 Data Delecta [1996] ECR I–4661; Case C– 323/95 Hayes [1997] ECR I–1711; Case C–122/96 Saldanha [1997] ECR I–5325.

124 E.g. Case C–274/96 Bickel and Franz [1998] ECR I–7637. Also: Case C–379/87 Groener [1989] ECR 3967; Case C–398/92 Mund & Fester [1994] ECR I–467; Case C–29/95 Pastoors [1997] ECR I–285; Case C–224/00 Commission v. Italy (Judgment of 19 March 2002).

125 E.g. Case 313/86 Lenoir [1988] ECR 5391.

126 E.g. Case C–20/96 Snares [1997] ECR I–6057; Case C–297/96 Partridge [1998] ECR I–3467.

127 E.g. Case C–90/97 Swaddling [1999] ECR I–1075 (especially AG Saggio, para 23 Opinion).

128 E.g. Case C–215/99 Jauch (Judgment of 8 March 2001). Especially under Art. 10 Reg. 1408/71, e.g. Case 24/74 Biason [1974] ECR 999; Case 92/81 Caracciolo [1982] ECR 2213; Case C–356/89 Newton [1991] ECR I–3017. Also under Art. 7(2) Reg. 1612/68, e.g. Case C–57/96 Meints [1997] ECR I–6689; Case C–35/97 Commission v. France [1998] ECR I–5325; cf. Case C–33/99 Amado (Judgment of 20 March 2001); Case C-43/99 Leclerc (Judgment of 31 May 2001).

129 E.g. Case C–111/91 Commission v. Luxembourg [1993] ECR I–817; Case C–299/01 Commission v. Luxembourg (Judgment of 20 June 2002). Consider also: Case 152/73 Sotgiu [1974] ECR 153; Case C–29/95 Pastoors [1997] ECR I–285; Case C–350/96 Clean Car Autoservice [1998] ECR I–2521; Case C–355/98 Commission v. Belgium [2000] ECR I–1221.

130 Cp. Case C–135/99 Elsen (Judgment of 23 November 2000).

131 Cp. Case C–281/98 Angonese [2000] ECR I–4139.

132 Case C–224/98 D’Hoop (Opinion of 21 February 2002; Judgment pending).

133 Case C–278/94 Commission v. Belgium [1996] ECR I–4307. Note, in particular, the analysis of AG Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, paras 60 to 78 Opinion.

134 Cf. caselaw concerning risks of seriously undermining the financial balance of domestic social security systems, e.g. Case C–158/96 Kohll [1998] ECR I–1931; Case C–368/98 Vanbraekel (Judgment of 12 July 2001); Case C–157/99 Peerbooms (Judgment of 12 July 2001). Also: caselaw concerning maintenance of a coherent taxation system, e.g. Case C–204/90 Bachmann [1992] ECR I–249; Case C–279/93 Schumacker [1995] ECR I–225; Case C–107/94 Asscher [1996] ECR I–3089; Case C–264/96 ICI [1998] ECR I–4695.

135 Cp. Case C–55/00 Gottardo (Judgment of 15 January 2002).

136 E.g. Report of the High Level Panel on the free movement of persons chaired by Mrs Simone Veil (presented to the Commission on 18 March 1997); European Parliament, Resolution on the sec ond Commission report on citizenship of the Union, OJ 1998 C 226/61; Economic and Social Committee, Opinion on Commission proposals concerning free movement of workers, OJ 1999 C 169/24.

137 Commission proposal for a Directive on the rights of Union citizens and their family mem bers to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States, COM(2001) 257 Final.

138 Presidency Conclusions of the Lisbon European Council (23–24 March 2000).

139 Consider, e.g. Council Resolution concerning an action plan for mobility, OJ 2000 C 371/4; Rec. 2001/613 on mobility within the Community for students, persons undergoing training, vol unteers, teachers and trainers, OJ 2001 L 215/30; Commission, Action Plan for Skills and Mobility, COM(2002) 72. Also: Commission proposal for a Directive concerning the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents, COM(2001) 127 Final; Commission proposal for a Directive on the conditions of entry and residence of third country nationals for the purpose of paid employ ment and self-employed economic activities, COM(2001) 386 Final.

140 Article-by-Article Commentary, especially Art. 21.

141 Para 2.3 Explanatory Memorandum.

142 There are special provisions for workers who become unemployed within the host state: Art. 8(7) draft Directive.

143 Case C–292/89 Antonissen [1991] ECR I–745, para 21.

144 E.g. Case 37/83 Rewe-Zentral v. Direktor der Landwirtschaftskammer Rheinland [1984] ECR 1229; Case C–63/89 Les Assurances du Crédit [1991] ECR I–1799; Case C–233/94 Germany v. Parliament and Council (Deposit Guarantee Schemes Directive) [1997] ECR I–2405; Case C–166/98 Socridis [1999] ECR I–3791.

145 E.g. Case C–479/93 Francovich II [1995] ECR I–3843; Case C–193/94 Skanavi [1996] ECR I–929. Cf. Case 41/84 Pinna [1986] ECR 1; Case 20/85 Roviello [1988] ECR 2805; Case 313/86 Lenoir [1988] ECR 5391. Further: Tridimas, T. The General Principles of EC Law (Oxford, OUP, 1999), 62–65 Google Scholar.

146 Cf. AG La Pergola in Case C–356/98 Kaba [2000] ECR I–2623, para 55 Opinion.

147 Cf. Case C–344/95 Commission v. Belgium [1997] ECR I–1035: domestic rules permitting expulsion of workseekers after fixed period, even if still looking for employment and had genuine chances of becoming engaged, breached Art. 39 EC.

148 In similar fashion to Antonissen itself. Note also: preamble to draft Directive refers to under lying need to avoid Union citizens becoming ‘unreasonable burden’ on public finances of host state, i.e. identical to preamble to Dir. 93/96 used in Grzelczyk to justify departure from strict terms of legislation.

149 Commission proposal for a Council Regulation on coordination of social security systems, COM(98) 779 Final.

150 Further: Sakslin, M. ‘Social Security Coordination: Adapting to Change’ (2000) 2 EJSS 169 Google Scholar; Eichenhofer, E. ‘How to Simplify the Coordination of Social Security’ (2000) 2 EJSS 231 Google Scholar; Pennings, F. ‘The European Commission Proposal to Simplify Regulation 1408/71’ (2001) 3 EJSS 45 Google Scholar.

151 E.g. Presidency Conclusions of the Lisbon European Council (23–24 March 2000).

152 Cf. previous Commission proposals for reform of unemployment benefit rules, OJ 1980 C 169/22; OJ 1996 C 68/11.

153 Further: Roberts, S. ‘The UK’s Response to the Proposal to Extend the Coordination of Social Security to Third Country Nationals’ (2000) 2 EJSS 189 Google Scholar. Cf. Presidency Conclusions of the Laeken European Council (14–15 December 2001), para 29; and of the Barcelona European Council (15–16 March 2002), para 33.