Analysis of Union Citizenship under Article 18 TFEU based on ECJ Decisions
| Author | Endri Papajorgji - Greta Alikaj |
| Position | Dean of the Faculty of Law at Tirana Business University College, Tirana, Albania - Ministry of Tourism and Environment |
| Pages | 18-21 |
Vo
l.
5
N
o
. 1
M
arch, 201
9
A
cademic Journal o
f
Business,
A
dministration, Law and Social Science
s
II
PCCL Publishin
g
, Graz-
A
ustri
a
ISS
N 2410-391
8
A
cces online at www.ii
p
ccl.or
g
1
8
Anal
y
sis of Union Citizenship under Article 18 TFEU based on ECJ Decision
s
Assoc. Pro
f
. Dr. Endri Papa
j
org
ji
Dean o
f
the Faculty o
f
Law at Tirana Business
U
niversity College, Tirana,
A
lbania
Msc. Greta A
l
i
k
a
j
M
inistry o
f
Tourism and
E
nvironmen
t
Ab
str
a
ct
Non discrimination and
U
nion Citizenship is regulated in
A
rt. 18-25 o
f
TF
EU
. The legal status
o
f
residence in a Member State through employment has improved, but contains certain
reservat
i
ons
,
1 which were regulated by the 2004 Directive
/
38 about General Freedom o
f
Movement.
A
ccor
d
ing to it, every
EU
citizen w
h
o
h
as a va
l
i
d
trave
l
d
ocument wit
h
h
im enjoys
the right o
f
residence
f
or himsel
f
and his
f
amily
f
or up to three months in a member state.
These articles
f
oresee the
f
ollowing conditions
f
or a period o
f
stay in a Member State longer
t
ha
n 3 m
o
nt
h
s
:
purpose o
f
paid or independent employment;
e
vidence o
f
su
cient living and health insurance
;
per
f
ormance o
f
a quali
f
ying pro
f
essional quali
fi
cation, or o
f
belonging to that State.
EU
citizens, who have legally stayed
f
or a period o
f
fi
ve years in the host country, have the
possibility to request the permanent residence
f
or their
f
amilies.
I
n this sense, main objective
o
f
this manuscript is the analysis o
f
U
nion Citizenship based on the latest
E
CJ decisions.
K
e
y
wor
d
s:
f
reedom o
f
movement,
E
CJ, Decisions,
EU
.
I
ntr
odu
ct
io
n
I
n addition to
f
reedom o
f
movement, the general prohibition o
f
discrimination on
t
he basis o
f
A
rticle 12 TF
EU
is o
f
p
articular im
p
ortance. The combined e
ect o
f
A
rticles 12 and 18 is
p
articularl
y
relevant in relation to the right to bene
fi
t
f
rom social
assistance
f
or
EU
nationals in other member states (ex. the right to compensation
fo
r
a
n
i
ncr
ea
s
e
i
n
Ma
rt
i
n
e
z S
ala
case, social assistance
f
or the minimum existence in
the
Grze
l
czy
k
case, student aid
f
or graduation in the D
'
Hoo
p
case
)
.
I
t is a com
p
etence
of
Member States to implement the
f
reedom o
f
movement, i
f
a national o
f
another
M
e
mb
e
r St
a
t
e
s
ee
ks s
o
c
ia
l
a
ss
i
st
a
nc
e
i
n th
e
a
bs
e
nc
e
of
r
e
s
ou
rc
e
s
a
nd d
oe
s n
o
t m
ee
t
t
h
e
c
o
nd
i
t
io
ns
of
r
e
s
i
d
e
nc
e
. Th
e
u
s
e
of
s
o
c
ia
l b
e
n
efi
ts b
a
s
e
d
o
n
T
ro
j
an
i
de
c
i
s
io
n s
hould
not automatically lead to such an extent.
I
t is the
fi
rst
E
CJ decision, which is also the
starting point
f
or recognizing the social and legal equality o
f
all
EU
citizens
.
M
artinez Sala v. Ba
y
ern,
f
rom 12.5.1998
2
The
p
lainti
is a S
p
anish citizen, that has been living in the Federal Re
p
ublic o
f
Germany since May 1968. She has been working in the Land o
f
Bayern since 1976,
1
For more in
f
ormation see
A
rticle 18,
p
oint 1 TF
EU
, according to which also in the rules o
f
a
pp
lica-
t
io
n
of
th
e
l
i
m
i
t
a
t
io
ns
a
nd c
o
nd
i
t
io
ns l
ai
d d
o
wn.
2
Ca se C-85
/
96, Martinez Sala v. Freistaat Ba
y
ern.
To continue reading
Request your trial