{"title":"确定求职者居留身份的界限及其以外:案例C-710/19 gma诉État belge","authors":"Rufat Babayev","doi":"10.1177/1023263X221078127","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This contribution examines the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union delivered in Case C-710/19 G.M.A. v État belge. It is argued that this ruling brings some degree of certainty and transparency to the nature and extent of residence rights guaranteed to jobseekers, considering the fragmented and dispersed outline of their status within the framework of Directive 2004/38. G.M.A. v État belge can also be viewed as a possible catalyst for recasting Directive 2004/38 to provide a clear and systematic layout of jobseekers’ residence status in host Member States. However, it is questionable whether this would, in fact, provide an enhanced protection of jobseekers, since this ruling to suggests that the Court's methodology to ascertain the residence rights of Union citizens varies based on the explicit wording of Union secondary law.","PeriodicalId":39672,"journal":{"name":"Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law","volume":"29 1","pages":"286 - 297"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Setting out the boundaries of jobseekers’ residence status and beyond: Case C-710/19 G.M.A. v État belge\",\"authors\":\"Rufat Babayev\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1023263X221078127\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This contribution examines the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union delivered in Case C-710/19 G.M.A. v État belge. It is argued that this ruling brings some degree of certainty and transparency to the nature and extent of residence rights guaranteed to jobseekers, considering the fragmented and dispersed outline of their status within the framework of Directive 2004/38. G.M.A. v État belge can also be viewed as a possible catalyst for recasting Directive 2004/38 to provide a clear and systematic layout of jobseekers’ residence status in host Member States. However, it is questionable whether this would, in fact, provide an enhanced protection of jobseekers, since this ruling to suggests that the Court's methodology to ascertain the residence rights of Union citizens varies based on the explicit wording of Union secondary law.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39672,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"286 - 297\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-18\",\"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/10.1177/1023263X221078127\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X221078127","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
摘要
这篇文章审查了欧洲联盟法院在C-710/19 G.M.A.诉État belge案中作出的判决。有人认为,考虑到2004/38号指令框架内求职者身份的支离破碎和分散,这一裁决在一定程度上为保障求职者居住权的性质和范围带来了确定性和透明度。gma v État比利时也可以被视为可能的催化剂,以重新制定第2004/38号指令,明确和系统地安排求职者在东道国的居留身份。然而,这是否会在事实上加强对求职者的保护是值得怀疑的,因为这项裁决表明,法院确定联盟公民居留权的方法因联盟二级法的明确措辞而有所不同。
Setting out the boundaries of jobseekers’ residence status and beyond: Case C-710/19 G.M.A. v État belge
This contribution examines the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union delivered in Case C-710/19 G.M.A. v État belge. It is argued that this ruling brings some degree of certainty and transparency to the nature and extent of residence rights guaranteed to jobseekers, considering the fragmented and dispersed outline of their status within the framework of Directive 2004/38. G.M.A. v État belge can also be viewed as a possible catalyst for recasting Directive 2004/38 to provide a clear and systematic layout of jobseekers’ residence status in host Member States. However, it is questionable whether this would, in fact, provide an enhanced protection of jobseekers, since this ruling to suggests that the Court's methodology to ascertain the residence rights of Union citizens varies based on the explicit wording of Union secondary law.