Case C-467/02

Inan Cetinkaya

v

Land Baden-Württemberg

(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Stuttgart)

(EEC-Turkey Association Agreement – Freedom of movement for workers – Articles 7, first paragraph, and 14(1) of Decision No 1/80 of the Association Council – Right of residence of the child of a Turkish worker after he has attained his majority – Conditions of an expulsion order – Criminal convictions)

Summary of the Judgment

1. International agreements – EEC-Turkey Association Agreement – Association Council set up by the EEC-Turkey Association Agreement – Decision No 1/80 – Family reunification – Members of the family of a Turkish worker duly registered as belonging to the labour force of a Member State – Definition – Child born and having always lived in the host Member State – Included

(Decision No 1/80 of the EEC-Turkey Association Council, Art. 7, first paragraph)

2. International agreements – EEC-Turkey Association Agreement – Association Council set up by the EEC-Turkey Association Agreement – Decision No 1/80 – Family reunification – Members of the family of a Turkish worker duly registered as belonging to the labour force of a Member State – Limitation of rights on the ground of prolonged absence from the labour force after the imposition of a custodial sentence followed by a course of detoxification – Not permissible

(Decision No 1/80 of the EEC-Turkey Association Council, Arts 7, first paragraph, and 14)

3. International agreements – EEC-Turkey Association Agreement – Association Council set up by the EEC-Turkey Association Agreement – Decision No 1/80 – Limitations of rights on the grounds of public order, public security and public health – Failure to take into consideration factual matters which occurred after the final decision of the competent authorities and which no longer justify a limitation of rights – Not permissible

(Decision No 1/80 of the EEC-Turkey Association Agreement, Art. 14(1))

1. The first paragraph of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 of the EEC-Turkey Association Council must be interpreted as applying to a person who has attained his majority and is the child of a Turkish worker duly registered as belonging to the labour force of the host Member State, even though that person was born in and has always resided in the host State.

The fact that that person, consequently, has not been authorised to join the worker in question within the meaning of the abovementioned provision has no effect on its application.

The requirement that family members obtain authorisation to join the Turkish worker is intended to exclude from the scope of that provision those who have entered and reside in the host Member State in breach of that Member State’s legislation. It cannot validly be raised as against a member of that family who, as in the case before the national court, was born and has always lived in that Member State and who therefore did not need authorisation to join the worker.

(see paras 19, 22-23, 34, operative part 1)

2. The rights which the first paragraph of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 of the EEC-Turkey Association Council confers on members of the family of a Turkish worker who fulfils the minimum residence condition may be limited only on the basis of Article 14 of Decision No 1/80, namely on grounds of public policy, public security or public health, or because the person concerned has left the host State for a significant length of time without legitimate reason.

It follows that the first paragraph of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 precludes the rights conferred by that provision on a Turkish national from being limited after the imposition of a custodial sentence followed by a course of detoxification, on the ground of prolonged absence from the labour force.

(see paras 38-39, operative part 2)

3. Article 14 of Decision No 1/80 of the EEC-Turkey Association Council, which authorises limitations on the rights conferred by that decision justified on the grounds of public policy, public security or public health, precludes national courts, when reviewing the lawfulness of the expulsion of a Turkish national, from not taking into consideration factual matters which occurred after the final decision of the competent authorities and which no longer justify a limitation of the rights of the person concerned within the meaning of that provision.

(see para. 48, operative part 3)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Second Chamber) 11 November 2004 (1)

(EEC-Turkey Association Agreement – Freedom of movement for workers – Articles 7, first paragraph, and 14(1) of Decision No 1/80 of the Association Council – Right of residence of the child of a Turkish worker after he has attained his majority – Conditions of an expulsion order – Criminal convictions)

In Case C-467/02,REFERENCE for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC, from the Verwaltungsgericht Stuttgart (Germany), made by decision of 19 December 2002, received at the Court on 27 December 2002, in the proceedings between:

and

THE COURT (Second Chamber),,

composed of C.W.A. Timmermans, President of the Chamber, J.-P. Puissochet, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues (Rapporteur), R. Schintgen and N. Colneric, Judges,

Advocate General: P. Léger,

after considering the observations submitted on behalf of:

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 10 June 2004,

gives the following

‘1. Subject to Article 7 on free access to employment for members of his family, a Turkish worker duly registered as belonging to the labour force of a Member State:

– shall be entitled in that Member State, after one year’s legal employment, to the renewal of his permit to work for the same employer, if a job is available;

– shall be entitled in that Member State, after three years of legal employment and subject to the priority to be given to workers of Member States of the Community, to respond to another offer of employment, with an employer of his choice, made under normal conditions and registered with the employment services of that State, for the same occupation;

– shall enjoy free access in that Member State to any paid employment of his choice, after four years of legal employment;

2.‘The members of the family of a Turkish worker duly registered as belonging to the labour force of a Member State, who have been authorised to join him:

Children of Turkish workers who have completed a course of vocational training in the host country may respond to any offer of employment there, irrespective of the length of time they have been resident in that Member State, provided one of their parents has been legally employed in the Member State concerned for at least three years.’

‘The provisions of this section shall be applied subject to limitations justified on grounds of public policy, public security or public health.’

‘(1)

1.

2.(2)

1.

2.‘(1)

1.

2.

3....

may be expelled only on serious grounds of public security or policy. Those grounds generally exist in the cases covered by in Paragraph 47(1).’

On those grounds, the Court (Second Chamber) rules as follows:

Signatures.