Joined Cases C-7/10 and C-9/10

Staatssecretaris van Justitie

v

Tayfun Kahveci and Osman Inan

(References for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands))

‛EEC-Turkey Association Agreement — Right of residence — Members of the family of a Turkish worker who has been naturalised — Retention of Turkish nationality — Date of naturalisation’

Summary of the Judgment

International agreements — EEC-Turkey Association Agreement — Association Council set up by the EEC-Turkey Association Agreement — Decision No 1/80 — Family reunification

(Decision No 1/80 EEC-Turkey Association Agreement, Arts 7 and 14(1))

Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 of the EEC-Turkey Association Council must be interpreted as meaning that the members of the family of a Turkish worker duly registered as belonging to the labour force of a Member State may still invoke that provision when that worker has acquired the nationality of the host Member State while retaining his Turkish nationality.

It follows both from the primacy of Union law and from the direct effect of a provision such as the first paragraph of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 that Member States may not alter unilaterally the scope of the system of gradually integrating Turkish nationals in the host Member State and therefore no longer have the power to adopt measures that could compromise the legal status expressly conferred on such nationals by the law resulting from the EEC-Turkey Association Agreement.

Accordingly, it is Article 14(1) of Decision 1/80 that establishes the relevant legal framework allowing it to be determined to what extent a Turkish national who has been convicted of criminal offences may be deprived, by means of expulsion from the host Member State, of the rights which he derives directly from that decision.

In that regard, it is for the national authorities concerned to assess, case by case, the personal conduct of the offender and whether it constitutes a present, genuine and sufficiently serious threat to public policy and security, and those authorities are also required to observe both the principle of proportionality and the fundamental rights of the person concerned. In particular, a measure ordering expulsion based on Article 14(1) of Decision No 1/80 may be taken only if the personal conduct of the person concerned indicates a specific risk of new and serious prejudice to the requirements of public policy.

(see paras 37, 39-41, operative part)

Joined Cases C-7/10 and C-9/10

Staatssecretaris van Justitie

v

Tayfun Kahveci and Osman Inan

(References for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands))

‛EEC-Turkey Association Agreement — Right of residence — Members of the family of a Turkish worker who has been naturalised — Retention of Turkish nationality — Date of naturalisation’

Summary of the Judgment

International agreements — EEC-Turkey Association Agreement — Association Council set up by the EEC-Turkey Association Agreement — Decision No 1/80 — Family reunification

(Decision No 1/80 EEC-Turkey Association Agreement, Arts 7 and 14(1))

Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 of the EEC-Turkey Association Council must be interpreted as meaning that the members of the family of a Turkish worker duly registered as belonging to the labour force of a Member State may still invoke that provision when that worker has acquired the nationality of the host Member State while retaining his Turkish nationality.

It follows both from the primacy of Union law and from the direct effect of a provision such as the first paragraph of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 that Member States may not alter unilaterally the scope of the system of gradually integrating Turkish nationals in the host Member State and therefore no longer have the power to adopt measures that could compromise the legal status expressly conferred on such nationals by the law resulting from the EEC-Turkey Association Agreement.

Accordingly, it is Article 14(1) of Decision 1/80 that establishes the relevant legal framework allowing it to be determined to what extent a Turkish national who has been convicted of criminal offences may be deprived, by means of expulsion from the host Member State, of the rights which he derives directly from that decision.

In that regard, it is for the national authorities concerned to assess, case by case, the personal conduct of the offender and whether it constitutes a present, genuine and sufficiently serious threat to public policy and security, and those authorities are also required to observe both the principle of proportionality and the fundamental rights of the person concerned. In particular, a measure ordering expulsion based on Article 14(1) of Decision No 1/80 may be taken only if the personal conduct of the person concerned indicates a specific risk of new and serious prejudice to the requirements of public policy.

(see paras 37, 39-41, operative part)