Free movement of persons – Residence based on Article 12 ofRegulation1612/68 / Libre circulación de personas – Residenciabasada en el Reglamento 1612/68

ICFNCONCLUSIONES DEL ABOGADOGENERAL SR. YVES BOT, de 15 enero 2013, en el Asunto C‑529/11 (Alarape y Tijani) / OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL BOT 15 January 2013 in Case C‑529/11

Trending topics: free movement of persons – Directive 2004/38/EC – Right of permanent residence – Article 16 – Legal residence – Residence based on Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 / Libre circulación de personas – Directiva 2004/38/CE – Derecho de residencia permanente – Artículo 16 – Residencia legal – Residencia basada en el artículo 12 del Reglamento (CEE) nº 1612/68.

*****

Comentario.Una interesante cuestión prejudicial ha sido planteada ante el TJUE (sub iudice). El asunto, que se enmarca en un litigio que enfrenta a una madre y su hijo, ambos nacionales de un tercer Estado, con el Secretary of State for the Home Department, al haber rechazado éste último su solicitud de concesión de un derecho de residencia permanente, suscita dos cuestiones de dificultad diversa. La primera, versa sobre las condiciones en las cuales el progenitor del hijo mayor de edad que cursa estudios puede beneficiarse de un derecho de residencia en virtud del artículo 12 del Reglamento (CEE) nº 1612/68 del Consejo, de 15 de octubre de 1968. Esta cuestión ha sido ampliamente resuelta por la jurisprudencia. La segunda, inédita, aunque encauzada por la reciente jurisprudencia, versa sobre si los períodos de residencia cumplidos en virtud del artículo 12 del Reglamento nº 1612/68 pueden hacer nacer un derecho de residencia permanente con arreglo a la Directiva 2004/38/CE del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 29 de abril de 2004. Ambas cuestiones han sido planteadas por el Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber), London (Reino Unido) y llevan al examen del concepto de residencia legal en el sentido de la Directiva 2004/38. Como ha señalado el Abogado General Sr. Bot en sus Conclusiones, dicho concepto resulta fundamental dado que condiciona el reconocimiento de la condición de residente permanente que, sin duda, constituye la
principal modificación de dicha Directiva. Como es sabido, la Directiva 2004/38 lleva a cabo la codificación de los instrumentos existentes y la integración del acervo jurisprudencial en materia de libre circulación de personas, basando la libertad de circulación en el estatuto de ciudadano de la Unión que, según una expresión empleada por primera vez por el Tribunal de Justicia en la sentencia Grzelczyk y retomada en múltiples ocasiones desde entonces (asunto Dereci, STJUE de 15.11.2011) tiene vocación de convertirse en el estatuto fundamental de los nacionales de los Estados miembros. Tras el examen de los hechos del caso, el Abogado General propone resolver en el sentido de que los períodos de residencia cubiertos con fundamento exclusivo en el artículo 12 del Reglamento (CEE) nº 1612/68 sin cumplir las condiciones previstas en el artículo 7, apartado 1, de la Directiva 2004/38/CE no deben tenerse en cuenta a efectos de la adquisición del derecho de residencia permanente previsto en dicha Directiva.

*****

Commentary.- This request for a preliminary ruling relates, first of all, to the conditions under which a derived right of residence may be obtained by the parent of a child who has been granted the right to pursue his studies in the host member State under Article 12 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of 15 October 1968 and, second, to the possibility for both the child having a right of residence on the basis of Article 12 and his parent having a derived right of residence to obtain a right of permanent residence under Article 18 of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004. The questions referred by the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber, London (United Kingdom) lead the Advocate General, in particular, to reconsider the concept of legal residence within the meaning of Directive 2004/38, a fundamental concept since it determines recognition of the status of permanent residence, which is undoubtedly the essential reform brought about by that directive. The present case, the background to which is a dispute between, on the one hand, a mother and her son, both nationals of a non-member country, and, on the other, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, on account of the latter’s rejection of their request for a grant of a right of permanent residence, raises two sets of questions, oneraising more difficulties than the other. The first, which hasalready been largely settled by the case-law, deals with the conditions under which the parent of an adult child pursuing his studies may be entitled to a right of residence under Article 12 of Regulation No 1612/68. The second, which is novel, but the solution to which seems to me to be largely determined by recent case-law, relates to whether periods of residence completed on the basis of Article 12 of Regulation No 1612/68 are capable of giving rise to a right of permanent residence under Directive 2004/38. The Opinion rules that the Court should answer the
fifth question referred by the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber), London, as follows: “Periods of residence completed on the sole basis of Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community, where the conditions set out in Article 7(1) of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC are not satisfied, must not be taken into account for the purpose of the acquisition of the right of permanent residence provided for in that directive”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s