WRITTEN QUESTION E-1650/00 by Kurt Lechner (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Rules on the right of residence in the EU of spouses from non-member States (applicant countries).
Date: 2000-05-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Hungary, Poland, accession to the European Union, divorced person, family migration, foreign national, mixed marriage, residence permit

20.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 89 E/67

(2001/C 89 E/065)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1650/00

by Kurt Lechner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 May 2000)

Subject: Rules on the right of residence in the EU of spouses from non-member States (applicant countries)

It is well known that under the German law on foreign nationals, when permission is granted for spouses
who are nationals of non-member States to stay in Germany, there are restrictions and time limits which
must be observed if the marriage breaks down. In many cases the spouse would have to leave Germany
and would have no individual entitlement to stay. In this connection the question arises whether the
beginning of accession negotiations with countries such as Poland and Hungary, which may join the EU in
the foreseeable future, has already brought about an improvement in the situation of spouses from these
applicant countries.

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(31 July 2000)

1.
Under current Community law, the rules governing family reunification of nationals of non-member
countries, including the rules on the acquisition by the spouse of a status independent of that of the
person whom they have joined fall within national legislation. But nationals of a non-member country
married to a Union citizen who has exercised his/her right to free movement falls within Community law.
However, in the event of divorce, Community law does not provide protection for a spouse who is a
national of a non-member country, in particular with regard to right of residence, which, in this case, falls
within national law. In the (cid:145)Diatta(cid:146) case (1) the Court of Justice ruled that Article 11 of Council Regulation
(EEC) No 1612/68 of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community (2)
does not confer on the members of a migrant worker(cid:146)s family an independent right of residence.

In December 1999 the Commission adopted a proposal for a Council Directive on the right to family
2.
reunification (3). this is currently under discussion in the Council and Parliament. The proposal is based on
Article 63(3) (former Article 73k) of the EC Treaty and lays down the conditions governing the right of
nationals of non-member countries to family reunification. It determines which members of the family are
eligible, the procedure to be followed, including the means of appeal, the rights of the family members in
particular with regard to the acquisition of an independent status following a given period of residence in a
Member State. The Commission proposal also contains a provision relating to the family reunification of
Union citizens who have not exercised their right to free movement.

The opening and conducting of negotiations with a view to accession by the applicant countries of
3.
Central and Eastern Europe does not have an immediate effect on the legal status of their citizens. This will
change following accession when the provisions relating to free movement of Union citizens become
applicable.

(1) Case 267/83, 13. February 1985.
(2) OJ L 295, 7.12.1968.
(3) COM(1999) 638 final.

(2001/C 89 E/066)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1658/00

by Miet Smet (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(26 May 2000)

Subject: Information on decisions concerning subsidies for type II twinning arrangements

Following the lead given by Adoptiedorpen Roemeniº-Vlaanderen (Romania-Flanders adoption villages),
which has been in existence for ten years, Adoptiedorpen Roemeniº-Kempen had the idea of organising a
twinning arrangement and a colloquium from 29 November to 8 December 1999, at a cost of € 49 145.
The documentation (99-0186) was submitted to the Commission as required, three months before the