The right to social assistance for economically inactive migrating Union citizens: The Court disregards the principle of proportionality and lets the Charter appease the consequences

Q2 Social Sciences
H. Verschueren
{"title":"The right to social assistance for economically inactive migrating Union citizens: The Court disregards the principle of proportionality and lets the Charter appease the consequences","authors":"H. Verschueren","doi":"10.1177/1023263X221116229","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In a new case on the right to social assistance for inactive migrating Union citizens, the CJEU delivered a judgment in which it confirmed its restrictive interpretation of the relevant primary and secondary Union law. At the same time, however, it invoked the EU Charter to appease the consequences of that. This case note critically analyses the Court’s restrictive application of the principle of non-discrimination of Article 18 TFEU and Article 24 Directive 2004/38/EC. It also comments on the Court’s implicit refusal to apply the principle of non-discrimination of Article 18 TFEU to a migrating Union citizen who has acquired a right of residence in the host country solely on the basis of the national law of that Member State. Further, it examines the role ascribed by the Court in this case to the Charter. The conclusion is that this judgment risks jeopardizing a number of fundamental basic principles of Union law while leaving a number of questions open.","PeriodicalId":39672,"journal":{"name":"Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law","volume":"29 1","pages":"483 - 498"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X221116229","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In a new case on the right to social assistance for inactive migrating Union citizens, the CJEU delivered a judgment in which it confirmed its restrictive interpretation of the relevant primary and secondary Union law. At the same time, however, it invoked the EU Charter to appease the consequences of that. This case note critically analyses the Court’s restrictive application of the principle of non-discrimination of Article 18 TFEU and Article 24 Directive 2004/38/EC. It also comments on the Court’s implicit refusal to apply the principle of non-discrimination of Article 18 TFEU to a migrating Union citizen who has acquired a right of residence in the host country solely on the basis of the national law of that Member State. Further, it examines the role ascribed by the Court in this case to the Charter. The conclusion is that this judgment risks jeopardizing a number of fundamental basic principles of Union law while leaving a number of questions open.
不从事经济活动的移民联邦公民获得社会援助的权利:法院无视相称原则,让《宪章》来平息后果
在一个关于非活跃移民欧盟公民获得社会援助权利的新案件中,欧盟法院作出了一项判决,确认了其对相关主要和次要欧盟法律的限制性解释。然而,与此同时,它援引了《欧盟宪章》来平息这一后果。本案例说明批判性地分析了法院对TFEU第18条和2004/38/EC第24条指令中不歧视原则的限制性适用。它还评论了法院含蓄地拒绝将《过渡联邦欧盟》第18条的不歧视原则适用于仅根据该成员国国内法获得东道国居留权的移民欧盟公民。此外,它还审查了法院在本案中赋予《宪章》的作用。结论是,这一判决有可能危及联邦法律的一些基本原则,同时留下一些悬而未决的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信