Advertisement

Case Selection and Data

  • Marie De Somer
Chapter
Part of the European Administrative Governance book series (EAGOV)

Abstract

This chapter presents the study’s data collection and the choices that grounded the selection of these data. A first section outlines why family reunification immigration was chosen as the case study. The section presents the two main analytical considerations that guide this choice relating, first, to the case law’s political sensitivity and, second, the long-term track record of CJEU jurisprudence in this field. A second section presents the different legal bases that ground the Court’s case law in this area, considers some of the characteristics of the case law record as a whole and presents some preliminary observations on ‘self-citation practices’, that is, observations of when the Court cites its own prior rulings.

Keywords

Free movement law EU citizenship EU immigration law Self-citation Least-likely case 

References

Primary Sources

    EU Law

    1. Council Directive 2001/55/EC on Minimum Standards for giving Temporary Protection in the Event of a Mass Influx of Displaced Persons and on Measures promoting a Balance of Efforts between Member States in receiving such Persons and bearing the Consequences thereof [2001] O.J. L 212/12.Google Scholar
    2. Council Directive 2003/86/EC on the Right to Family Reunification [2003] O.J. L 251/12.Google Scholar
    3. Council Directive 2003/109/EC Concerning the Status of Third-Country Nationals Who are Long-term Residents [2003] O.J. L 16/44.Google Scholar
    4. Council Directive 2009/50/EC the Conditions of Entry and Residence of Third-country Nationals for the Purposes of Highly Qualified Employment [2009] O.J. L 155/17.Google Scholar
    5. Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Right of Citizens of the Union and their Family Members to Move and Reside Freely Within the Territory of the Member States [2004] O.J. L 158/77.Google Scholar
    6. Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on Common Standards and Procedures in Member States for Returning Illegally Staying Third-Country Nationals [2008] O.J. L 348/98.Google Scholar
    7. Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on Standards for the Qualification of Third-country Nationals or Stateless Persons as Beneficiaries of International Protection, for a Uniform Status for Refugees or for Persons Eligible for Subsidiary Protection, and for the Content of the Protection Granted [2011] O.J. L 337/9.Google Scholar
    8. Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council Laying Down Standards for the Reception of Applicants for International Protection [2013] O.J. L 180/96.Google Scholar
    9. Regulation (EEC) No 15/61 of the Council on Initial Measures to Bring About Free Movement of Workers within the Community [1961] O.J. 57/1073.Google Scholar
    10. Regulation (EEC) No 38/64 of the Council on the Freedom of Movement for Workers within the Community [1964] O.J. 64/965.Google Scholar
    11. Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council on Freedom of Movement for Workers within the Community [1968] O.J. 257.Google Scholar
    12. Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council Establishing the Criteria and Mechanisms for Determining the Member State Responsible for Examining an Application for International Protection Lodged in one of the Member States by a Third-country National or a Stateless Person [2013] O.J. L 180/31.Google Scholar

    EU Documents

    1. Commission Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States, COM (2001) 257 (final).Google Scholar
    2. Commission Amended Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive on the right of citizens of the union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States, COM (2003) 199 (final).Google Scholar

    CJEU Case Law

    1. Case C-40/76 Slavica Kermaschek v Bundesanstalt für Arbeit [1976] ECR 1669.Google Scholar
    2. Case C-35/82 Elestina Esselina Christina Morson v State of the Netherlands and Head of the Plaatselijke Politie within the Meaning of the Vreemdelingenwet; Sweradjie Jhanjan v State of the Netherlands [1982] ECR 3723.Google Scholar
    3. Case C-94/84 Office national de l’emploi v Joszef Deak [1985] ECR 1873.Google Scholar
    4. Case C-131/85 Emir Gül v Regierungspräsident Düsseldorf [1986] ECR 1573.Google Scholar
    5. Case C-85/96 María Martínez Sala v Freistaat Bayern [1998] ECR I-2691.Google Scholar
    6. Case C-189/00 Urszula Ruhr v Bundesanstalt für Arbeit [2001] ECR I-8225.Google Scholar

    Other Sources

    1. Eurostat. (2015). Residence Permit Statistics. Retrieved November 13, 2015, from http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Residence_permits_statistics
    2. Eurostat. (2017). Residence Permit Statistics. Retrieved December 28, 2017, from http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Residence_permits_statistics

Literature

  1. Arnull, A. (1993). Owning up to Fallibility: Precedent and the Court of Justice. Common Market Law Review, 30(2), 247–266.Google Scholar
  2. Barrett, G. (2003). Family Matters: European Community Law and Third-Country Family Members. Common Market Law Review, 40(2), 369–421.Google Scholar
  3. Block, L. (2015). Regulating Membership: Explaining Restriction and Stratification of Family Migration in Europe. Journal of Family Issues, 36(11), 1433–1452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carens, J. (2003). Who Should Get in? The Ethics of Immigration Admissions. Ethics & International Affairs, 17(1), 95–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carruba, C. (2005). Courts and Compliance in International Regulatory Regimes. The Journal of Politics, 67(3), 669–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carruba, J., Gabel, M., & Hankla, C. (2012). Understanding the Role of the European Court of Justice in European Integration. American Political Science Review, 106(1), 214–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cholewinski, R. (2002). Family Reunification and Conditions Placed on Family Members: Dismantling a Fundamental Human Right. European Journal of Migration and Law, 4(3), 271–290.Google Scholar
  8. Costello, C. (2014). Article 33—Family and Professional Life. In S. Peers, T. Hervey, J. Kenner, & A. Ward (Eds.), The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: A Commentary (pp. 891–925). Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  9. Eisele, K. (2014). The External Dimension of the EU’s Migration Policy. Different Legal Positions of Third-Country Nationals in the EU: A Comparative Perspective. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fetzer, J. (2012). Public Opinion and Populism. In M. Rosenblum & D. Tichenor (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the Politics of International Migration (pp. 301–323). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Freeman, P., Hansen, R., & Leal, D. (2013). Immigration and Public Opinion in Liberal Democracies. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Garrett, G. (1992). International Cooperation and Institutional Choice: The European Community’s Internal Market. International Organization, 46(2), 533–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Garrett, G., Kelemen, R. D., & Schulz, H. (1998). The European Court of Justice, National Governments, and Legal Integration in the European Union. International Organization, 52(1), 149–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Geddes, A. (2003). The Politics of Migration and Immigration in Europe. London: SAGE Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. George, A., & Bennett, A. (2005). Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  16. Gerring, J. (2007). Case Study Research: Principles and Practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Groenendijk, K. (2009). Forty Years of Free Movement of Workers: Has It Been A Success and Why? In P. Minderhoud & N. Trimikliniotis (Eds.), Rethinking the Free Movement of Workers: The European Challenges Ahead (pp. 11–23). Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers.Google Scholar
  18. Guild, E. (2009). Free Movement of Workers: From Third Country National to Citizen of the Union. In P. Minderhoud & N. Trimikliniotis (Eds.), Rethinking the Free Movement of Workers: The European Challenges Ahead (pp. 25–38). Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers.Google Scholar
  19. Guild, E., Peers, S., & Tomkin, J. (2014). The EU Citizenship Directive: A Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Jacob, M. (2014). Precedents and Case-based Reasoning in the European Court of Justice: Unfinished Business. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Joppke, C. (1998a). Immigration Challenges the Nation-State. In C. Joppke (Ed.), Challenge to the Nation-State: Immigration in Western Europe and the United States (pp. 5–48). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Joppke, C. (1998b). Why Liberal States Accept Unwanted Immigration. World Politics, 50(2), 266–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Joppke, C. (1999). Immigration and the Nation-State. The United States, Germany and Great Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lahav, G. (1997). International Versus National Constraints in Family-Reunification Migration Policy. Global Governance, 3(3), 349–372.Google Scholar
  25. Levy, J. (2008). Case Studies: Types, Designs and Logics of Inference. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 25(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Messina, A. (2007). The Logics and Politics of Post-WWII Immigration to Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Peers, S. (2011). EU Justice and Home Affairs Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Schweitzer, R. (2015). A Stratified Right to Family Life? On the Logic (s) and Legitimacy of Granting Differential Access to Family Reunification for Third-Country Nationals Living within the EU. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 41(13), 2130–2148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Shaw, J. (2011). Concluding Thoughts—Rottmann in Context. In J. Shaw (Ed.), Has the European Court of Justice Challenged Member State Sovereignty in Nationality Law? EUI Working Paper, RSCAS, 2011/62. Florence: European University Institute.Google Scholar
  30. Spaventa, E. (2008). Seeing the Wood Despite the Trees? On the Scope of Union Citizenship and its Constitutional Effects. Common Market Law Review, 45, 13–45.Google Scholar
  31. Stalford, H. (2012). Children and the European Union: Rights, Welfare and Accountability. London: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  32. Stalford, H. (2015). The CRC in Litigation Under EU Law. In T. Liefaard & J. Doek (Eds.), Litigating the Rights of the Child: The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child in Domestic and International Jurisprudence (pp. 211–230). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  33. Staver, A. (2013). Free Movement and the Fragmentation of Family Reunification Rights. European Journal of Migration and Law, 15, 69–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Stone Sweet, A. (2004). The Judicial Construction of Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Strik, T. (2011). Besluitvorming over asiel- en migratierichtlijnen. De wisselwerking tussen nationaal en Europees niveau. Den Haag: Boom Juridische uitgevers.Google Scholar
  36. Tomkin, J. (2009). The Worker, The Citizen, Their Families and the Court of Justice: Tales of Free Movement from Luxembourg. In P. Minderhoud & N. Trimikliniotis (Eds.), Rethinking the Free Movement of Workers: The European Challenges Ahead (pp. 39–59). Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers.Google Scholar
  37. Tryfonidou, A. (2009). Family Reunification Rights of (Migrant) Union Citizens: Towards a More Liberal Approach. European Law Journal, 15(5), 634–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Van Elsuwege, P., & Kochenov, D. (2011). On the Limits of Judicial Intervention: EU Citizenship and Family Reunification Rights. European Journal of Migration and Law, 13(4), 443–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Walter, A. (2008). Reverse Discrimination and Family Reunification. Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marie De Somer
    • 1
  1. 1.University of LeuvenLeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations