# C_2007297EN.01001401.xml

| 8.12.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 297/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.12.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 297/14

---

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 4 October 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Darmstadt — Germany) — Murat Polat v Stadt Rüsselsheim

(Case C-349/06) (1)

1

(EEC-Turkey Association Agreement - Article 59 of the Additional Protocol - First paragraph of Article 7 and Article 14 of Decision No 1/80 of the Association Council - Directive 2004/38/EC - Right of residence of a Turkish worker's child - Adult child who is no longer dependent on his parents - Numerous criminal convictions - Lawfulness of an expulsion order)

(2007/C 297/21)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Darmstadt

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Murat Polat

Applicant:

Defendant: Stadt Rüsselsheim

Defendant:

Re:

Preliminary ruling — Verwaltungsgericht Darmstadt — Interpretation of the second indent of the first sentence of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 of the EEC/Turkey Association Council, of Article 59 of the Additional Protocol relating to the transitional phase provided for in the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Economic Community and Turkey, signed on 23 November 1970 (OJ 1977 L 361, p. 60), and of Article 28 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 (OJ 2004 L 158, p. 77) — Right of residence of a Turkish national who entered the national territory as a minor by way of family reunification and who was financially independent after his majority — Return to the national territory in a position of financial dependence vis-à-vis his parents — Acquisition of the right of residence for adults financially dependent on their parents — Conditions under which the right of residence is lost — Criminal convictions — Lawfulness of a decision to expel.

vis-à-vis

Operative part of the judgment

| 1) | A Turkish national, who was authorised while he was a child to enter the territory of a Member State in order to join his family and who has acquired the right of free access to any paid employment of his choice under the second indent of the first paragraph of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 of 19 September 1980 on the development of the Association, adopted by the Association Council set up by the Association Agreement between the European Economic Community and Turkey, loses the right of residence in the host Member State which is a corollary of that right of free access only in two situations, that is:






  — | in the circumstances provided for in Article 14(1) of that decision, or |
| --- | --- | --- |

1)

A Turkish national, who was authorised while he was a child to enter the territory of a Member State in order to join his family and who has acquired the right of free access to any paid employment of his choice under the second indent of the first paragraph of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 of 19 September 1980 on the development of the Association, adopted by the Association Council set up by the Association Agreement between the European Economic Community and Turkey, loses the right of residence in the host Member State which is a corollary of that right of free access only in two situations, that is:

—

in the circumstances provided for in Article 14(1) of that decision, or

| — | if he leaves the territory of the Member State concerned for a significant length of time without legitimate reason, |
| --- | --- |

—

if he leaves the territory of the Member State concerned for a significant length of time without legitimate reason,

even though he is over 21 years of age, is no longer dependent on his parents, but lives independently in the Member State concerned, and was not available to join the labour force for several years because he was during that period serving an unsuspended sentence of imprisonment.

Such an interpretation is not inconsistent with the requirements of Article 59 of the Additional Protocol signed at Brussels on 23 November 1970 and concluded, approved and confirmed on behalf of the Community by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2760/72 of 19 December 1972;

| 2) | Article 14(1) of Decision No 1/80 must be interpreted as not precluding the taking of an expulsion measure against a Turkish national who has been the subject of several criminal convictions, provided that his behaviour constitutes a genuine and sufficiently serious threat to a fundamental interest of society. It is for the national court to determine whether that is the case in the main proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Article 14(1) of Decision No 1/80 must be interpreted as not precluding the taking of an expulsion measure against a Turkish national who has been the subject of several criminal convictions, provided that his behaviour constitutes a genuine and sufficiently serious threat to a fundamental interest of society. It is for the national court to determine whether that is the case in the main proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 281, 18.11.2006.

1

---