Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2013:683
Date: 2013-10-24
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Third Chamber
Subject matter: Citizenship of the Union;Right of entry and residence
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Germany

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber), 24 October 2013 1. Citizenship of the Union — Provisions of the Treaty — Scope ratione personae — National of a Member State studying in another Member State — Included — Effect –Benefit of rights attaching to the status of citizen of the European Union (Arts 6(e) TFEU, 20 TFEU, 21 TFEU and 165(1) TFEU) 2. Citizenship of the Union — Right to move and reside freely on the territory of the Member State — Education and training grants awarded to students who are nationals for studies pursued in another Member State — Award subject to having a permanent residence in the territory of the awarding Member State — Not permissible — Justification — None (Arts 20 TFEU and 21 TFEU) 1. See the text of the decision. (see paras 18-24) 2. Articles 20 TFEU and 21 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State, which, as a rule, makes the award of an education or training grant for studies pursued in another Member State subject to the sole condition of having established a permanent residence, within the meaning of that legislation, on national territory for three years at least before the start of those studies and which, in a case where the applicant is a national of that State with no permanent residence within that State for the requisite period, provides for a grant for education or training abroad only in the applicant’s State of residence or in a neighbouring State thereof and only where specific circumstances justify such a grant. That legislation constitutes a restriction on the right to freedom of movement and residence enjoyed by all citizens of the Union pursuant to Article 21 TFEU, in that it is likely to dissuade European Union nationals from exercising their right to freedom of movement and residence in another Member State, given the impact that exercising that freedom is likely to have on the right to the education or training grant. The restriction flowing from the legislation at issue in the main proceedings can be justified in the light of EU law only if it is based on objective considerations of public interest independent of the nationality of the persons concerned and if it is proportionate to the legitimate objective pursued by the provisions of national law. In that regard, the condition of permanent residence, despite the limited derogations thereto, is at the same time too general and too exclusive in nature. That restriction on the right to freedom of movement and of residence may therefore not be considered to be proportionate to the financial objective pursued. (see paras 27-29, 46, 51, operative part)