CJEU - Case C 338/13, Marjan Noorzia v Bundesministerin für Inneres
| Country of Domestic Proceedings: | Austria |
| Country of applicant: | Afghanistan |
| Court name: | Second Chamber of the CJEU |
| Date of decision: | 17-07-2014 |
| Citation: | C‑338/13 |
Keywords:
| Keywords |
|
Family member
{ return; } );"
>
Description
"Generally, persons married to a migrant, or having a relationship legally recognised as equivalent to marriage, as well as their dependent children and other dependants who are recognised as members of the family by applicable legislation. In the context of the Family Reunification Directive 2003/86/EC (and 2003/109/EC, Long-Term Residents), a third-country national, as specified in Article 4 of said Directive and in accordance with the transposition of this Article 4 into national law in the Member State concerned, who has entered the EU for the purpose of Family Reunification… In the context of Asylum, and in particular Council Regulation (EC) 343/2003 (Determining responsible Member State for Asylum claim), this means insofar as the family already existed in the country of origin, the following members of the applicant's family who are present in the territory of the Member States: (i) the spouse of the asylum seeker or his or her unmarried partner in a stable relationship, where the legislation or practice of the Member State concerned treats unmarried couples in a way comparable to married couples under its law relating to aliens; (ii) the minor children of couples referred to in point (i) or of the applicant, on condition that they are unmarried and dependent and regardless of whether they were born in or out of wedlock or adopted as defined under the national law; (iii) the father, mother or guardian when the applicant or refugee is a minor and unmarried." |
|
Family reunification
{ return; } );"
>
Description
"The establishment of a family relationship which is either: (a) the entry into and residence in a Member State, in accordance with Council Directive 2003/86/EC, by family members of a third-country national residing lawfully in that Member State (""sponsor"") in order to preserve the family unit, whether the family relationship arose before or after the entry of the sponsor; or (b) between an EU national and third-country national established outside the EU who then subsequently enters the EU." |
|
Sponsor
{ return; } );"
>
Description
"Broadly, a person or entity which undertakes a (legal, financial or personal) engagement, promise or pledge, on behalf of another. In the EU context of Family Reunification, a third-country national residing lawfully in a Member State and applying or whose family members apply for family reunification to be joined with him/her." |
Headnote:
A national law which requires the sponsor and his/her spouse to have reached the age of 21 by the date on which the application for family reunification is submitted (rather than by the date on which the decision on the application is made) is consistent with Art. 4 (5) of the Family Reunion Directive (Directive 2003/86/EC)
Facts:
Council Directive 2003/86/EC on the right to family reunification determines the conditions for the exercise of the right to family reunification by third country nationals residing lawfully in the territory of the Member States. Under Article 4(5), ‘In order to ensure better integration and to prevent forced marriages Member States may require the sponsor and his/her spouse to be of a minimum age, and at maximum 21 years, before the spouse is able to join him/her’. Austrian law requires both the sponsor and spouse to be 21 at the time the application for reunification is submitted.
Mrs Noorzia, an Afghan national, submitted an application at the Austrian embassy in Islamabad (Pakistan) for family reunification with her husband, an Afghan national living in Austria. The Austrian authorities rejected the application because, at the time it was submitted, the husband was under 21. By the time the rejection decision was made, the husband had turned 21, which prompted Mrs Noorzia to appeal, and in turn motivated the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (the Austrian Higher Administrative Court) to refer a question on the compatibility of this decision with Article 4(5).
Question referred for a preliminary ruling
Is Article 4(5) of Council Directive 2003/86/EC to be interpreted as precluding a provision under which spouses and registered partners must already have reached the age of 21 years at the time at which the application is submitted in order to be considered to be entitled to join other family members?
Decision & reasoning:
The CJEU advances that by not specifying whether the minimum age condition should be met at the time of the application or at the time of the decision on the application for family reunification, the EU legislature intended to leave to the Member States a margin of discretion, subject to the requirement not to impair the effectiveness of EU law.
The Court goes on to note that the Austrian law, requiring that age 21 must be reached prior to lodging an application does not prevent the exercise of the right to family reunification nor render it excessively difficult. Indeed, on the contrary, such a rule prevents forced marriage, is consistent with the principles of equal treatment and legal certainty and, finally, ensures that ‘the success of the application depends principally on circumstances attributable to the applicant and not to the administration, such as the length of time taken considering the application’ [18].
Outcome:
The Court ruled:
Article 4(5) of Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification must be interpreted as meaning that that provision does not preclude a rule of national law requiring that spouses and registered partners must have reached the age of 21 by the date when the application seeking to be considered family members entitled to reunification is lodged.
Subsequent proceedings:
Unkown
Observations/comments:
The CJEU’s answer goes against the Opinion of Advocate General Mengozzi, who argued that, on a literal interpretation of Article 4(5), the relevant time at which to consider the age of the applicant is the time of the authorities’ decision, not the time of the application. The AG reasoned that such an interpretation promotes the fundamental right to family life, does not frustrate the legitimate objective of preventing forced marriages, and counteracts an overly formalistic reading of the Directive. In addition, no provision of the Directive makes reaching the age of 21 a prior requirement before the initial making of an application for family reunification.
The judgment has been criticised on account of its employment of a strict approach towards immigrants as well as a departure from previous cases such as Chakroun, where the Court held that family reunification constitutes the general rule and that any limitations should be interpreted strictly.
Georgios Milios, The CJEU’s approach on the minimum age requirement for spouses in an application for family reunification, July 2014
Relevant International and European Legislation:
Cited National Legislation:
| Cited National Legislation |
| Austria - Niederlassungs- und Aufenthaltsgesetz (Settlement and Residence Act) |
Follower Cases:
| Follower Cases |
| CJEU - Case C-550/16 A and S, 12 April 2018 |