Title OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL CAMPOS SÁNCHEZ-BORDONA delivered on 26 February 2019(1) Case C‑129/18 SM v Entry Clearance Officer, UK Visa Section
Publisher European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union
Publication Date 26 February 2019
Country Algeria | United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Topics Adoption | Family reunification
Citation / Document Symbol ECLI:EU:C:2019:140
Related Document(s) SM v Entry Clearance Officer, UK Visa Section (C-129/18) (request for preliminary ruling)
Cite as OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL CAMPOS SÁNCHEZ-BORDONA delivered on 26 February 2019(1) Case C‑129/18 SM v Entry Clearance Officer, UK Visa Section , ECLI:EU:C:2019:140 , European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union, 26 February 2019, available at: https://www.refworld.org/cases,ECJ,5c793f9f4.html [accessed 1 October 2022]
Comments I suggest that the Court of Justice should reply to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in the following terms: (1) Article 2(2)(c) 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 (EEC) 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 is to be interpreted as meaning that a child cannot be classed as a ‘direct descendant’ of a Union citizen where the child is only in the legal guardianship of that Union citizen under the institution of recueil legal (kafala) that applies in the Republic of Algeria. That child may, however, fall within the category of ‘other family members’ if the other requirements are satisfied and following completion of the procedure laid down in Article 3(2) of Directive 2004/38, in which case the host Member State must facilitate his or her entry and residence in that Member State in accordance with national legislation, having weighed the protection of family life and the defence of the child’s best interests. (2) Articles 27 and 35 of Directive 2004/38 can be applied in any of the situations referred to in that directive where grounds of public policy, public security or public health apply, and in the event of abuse of rights or fraud. (3) In applying Article 3(2) of Directive 2004/38, the authorities of the host Member State may enquire into whether sufficient regard was had, in the procedure for awarding guardianship or custody, to the best interests of the child.
DisclaimerThis is not a UNHCR publication. UNHCR is not responsible for, nor does it necessarily endorse, its content. Any views expressed are solely those of the author or publisher and do not necessarily reflect those of UNHCR, the United Nations or its Member States.