Third Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the application of Directives 93/96, 90/364, 90/365 on the right of residence for students, economically inactive and retired Union citizens {SEC(2006) 424}
Date: 2006-04-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU national, European citizenship, freedom of movement, non-working population, report, residence permit, retired person, student

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 5.4.2006 
COM(2006) 156 final 

THIRD REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT  

on the application of Directives 93/96, 90/364, 90/365 on the right of residence for 
students, economically inactive and retired Union citizens 

{SEC(2006) 424} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
THIRD REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION  
TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT  

on the application of Directives 93/96, 90/364, 90/365 on the right of residence for 
students, economically inactive and retired Union citizens 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

With  this  report,  the  Commission  is  discharging  its  obligation  under  Article  4  of  Directives 
90/3641  on  the  right  of  residence  and  90/3652  on  the  right  of  residence  for  employed  and 
self-employed persons who have ceased their occupational activity and Article 5 of Directive 
93/963  on  the  right  of  residence  for  students,  to  draw  up  a  report  every  three  years  on  the 
application of the Directives and to submit it to the European Parliament and the Council. 

The purpose of the Report is to present the main developments with regard to the Directives 
during the period 2003-2005 and the main innovations of Directive 2004/384 of 29 April 2004 
on  the  right  of  residence  of  Union  citizens  and  their  family  members  to  move  and  reside 
freely  within  the  territory  of  the  Member  States,  which  will  repeal  and  replace  the  three 
Directives with effect from 30.4.2006. 

2. 

THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE CASE LAW OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE 

Four  major  judgments  were  given  by  the  Court  of  Justice  in  the  reference  period  on  the 
interpretation of the Directives. 

The  Court  recalled  that  the  right  to  reside  in  the  territory  of  a  Member  State  is  conferred 
directly on every citizen of the Union by Article 18(1) EC and that citizenship of the Union is 
destined to be the fundamental status of nationals of Member States, enabling those who find 
themselves  in  the  same  situation  to  receive  the  same  treatment  in  law  irrespective  of  their 
nationality  subject  to  such  exceptions  as  are  expressly  provided  for.  It  also  underlined  the 
need to interpret the right of free movement in the light of fundamental rights and in particular 
of the right to protection of family life and the principle of proportionality. 

1 
2 
3 
4 

OJ L 180, 13.7.1990, p. 26 
OJ L 180, 13.7.1990, p. 28 
OJ L 317, 18.12.1993, p. 59 
Directive  2004/38/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  29.4.2004  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/EC (OJ L 158 of 30.4.2004, p. 77) 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Judgment of 7.9.2004 in case C-456/02 Michel Trojani v 
Centre public d'aide sociale de Bruxelles 

The  Court  recalled  that  the  right  to  reside  in  the  territory  of  the  Member  States  is  not 
unconditional but conferred subject to the limitations and conditions laid down by the Treaty 
and by the measures adopted to give it effect. 

While  the  Member  States  may  make  residence  of  an  economically  inactive  Union  citizen 
conditional on his having sufficient resources, such a person can benefit from the principle of 
equal  treatment  where  he  has  been  lawfully  resident  there  for  a  certain  time  or  possesses  a 
residence permit. 

The  Court  confirmed  that  it  remains  open  to  the  host  Member  State  to  take  the  view  that  a 
person  who  has  recourse  to  social  assistance  no  longer  fulfils  the  conditions  of  the  right  of 
residence.  In  such  a  case  the  host  Member  State  may,  within  the  limits  imposed  by 
Community  law,  take  a  measure  to  remove  him.  However,  recourse  to  the  social  assistance 
system may not automatically entail such a measure. 

Judgment of 19.10.2004 in case C-200/02 Kunqian Catherine Zhu and Man Lavette Chen 
v Secretary of State for the Home Department 

The Court held that the situation of a Union citizen who was born in a Member State other 
than that of his or her nationality and has not made use of the right to freedom of movement 
cannot, for that reason alone, be assimilated to a purely internal situation, thereby depriving 
that national of the benefit in the host Member State of the provisions of Community law on 
freedom of movement. 

The Court then held that the capacity to be the holder of rights guaranteed by the Treaty and 
by secondary law to move and reside freely cannot be made conditional upon the attainment 
by the person concerned of the age prescribed for the acquisition of legal capacity to exercise 
those rights personally. 

The Court recognised that  Directive  90/364 lays down no  requirement  whatsoever as  to the 
origin  of  the  necessary  sufficient  resources  and  dismissed  all  objections  that  the  condition 
concerning  the  availability  of  sufficient  resources  means  that  the  person  concerned  must 
possess  those  resources  personally  and  may  not  use  for  that  purpose  those  of  an 
accompanying family member. Such interpretation would add to the condition formulated in 
the Directive a requirement as to the origin of the resources which, not being necessary for the 
attainment  of  the  objective  of  protection  of  the  public  finances,  would  constitute  a 
disproportionate  interference  with  the  exercise  of  the  fundamental  right  of  freedom  of 
movement and of residence. 

It admitted that a refusal to allow the parent, whether a Union citizen or a national of a non-
member  country,  who  is  the  carer  of  a  child  to  whom  Article  18  EC  and  Directive  90/364 
grant a right of residence, to reside with that child in the host Member State would deprive the 
child's right of residence of any useful effect and concluded that enjoyment by a young child 
of a right of residence necessarily implies that the child is entitled to be accompanied by the 
person who is his or her primary carer. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
Judgment of 15.3.2005 in case C-209/03 The Queen (on the application of Dany Bidar) v 
London Borough of Ealing and Secretary of State for Education and Skills 

The Court reversed the position it had held previously in the Lair (39/86) and Brown (197/86) 
judgments  and  concluded  that  assistance  to  students  to  cover  their  maintenance  costs  falls 
within the scope of application of the Treaty for the purposes of Article 12 EC. 

The  Court  recognised  that  students  who  go  to  another  Member  State  to  pursue  higher 
education  there  and  enjoy  a  right  of  residence  there  for  that  purpose  under  Directive  93/96 
cannot  base  any  right  to  payment  of  maintenance  assistance  on  that  Directive.  However, 
Directive 93/96 does not preclude a national of a Member State who by virtue of Article 18 
EC and Directive 90/364 is lawfully resident in the territory of another Member State where 
he  intends  to  start  or  pursue  higher  education  from  relying  during  that  residence  on  the 
principle of equal treatment. 

The  Court  also  held  that  it  is  legitimate  for  a  Member  State  to  grant  the  assistance  only  to 
students who have demonstrated a certain degree of integration into the society of that State 
by requiring that the student has resided there for a certain period of time. 

It concluded that Article 12 EC must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which 
excludes a national of another Member State from the right to assistance covering students’ 
maintenance costs even if that national is lawfully resident and has received a substantial part 
of  his  secondary  education  in  the  host  Member  State  and  has  consequently  established  a 
genuine link with the society of that State. 

The UK implemented the judgment by amending the Student Support Regulations in England 
and Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland by way of Statutory Instruments 2005 Nos. 1341 
and 2084, Statutory Rule 2005 No. 323 and Scottish Statutory Instrument 2005 No. 341. 

Judgment of 14.4.2005 in case C-157/03 Commission v Spain 

An action against Spain was brought before the Court on 7.3.2003 by the Commission. The 
Court repeated that the conditions which may be required for the issue of a residence permit 
are laid down in the respective Directives and are exhaustive in nature. Member States must 
issue  an  entry  visa  to  family  members  who  are  nationals  of  certain  third  countries  without 
delay  and,  as  far  as  possible,  at  the  place  of  entry.  The  Court  found  that  the  Spanish  rules 
requiring that a residence visa for family reunification be obtained by such nationals for the 
issue of a residence permit, constituted an incorrect transposition of and a measure contrary 
to, inter alia, Directive 90/365. 

The Court stressed that Directive 64/221 provides that the Member State must take a decision 
on whether to grant a residence permit as soon as possible and in any event not later than six 
months from the date on which the application was submitted. It found that by failing to issue 
a residence permit within that time, Spain had failed to fulfil its obligations under Directive 
64/221. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
3. 

THE ACTION OF THE COMMISSION AS GUARDIAN OF COMMUNITY LAW 

Documents required from Union citizens when entering or leaving a Member State 

The  Commission  received  during  the  period  of  reference  an  ever  increasing  number  of 
complaints,  in  particular  from  nationals  of  the  acceding  countries,  concerning  the  rights  of 
Union citizens travelling to other Member States. A letter was sent to all Member States on 
10.8.2005 reminding them that under Community law, as confirmed by case law, they should 
allow any Union citizen to leave or enter their territory on the simple presentation of a valid 
identity card or passport. 

Member States may, therefore, not require authorities or carriers to request a passport instead 
of an identity card, or to request a residence card or a return ticket or require or recommend 
that a passport or an identity card has to be valid for a certain length of time after return. 

In  accordance  with  the  replies  received,  the  national  legislation  of  Member  States  is  in 
conformity with Community law. 

The Commission will continue to take action in cases of incorrect application. 

Access to social advantages 

The  Commission  services  are  examining  complaints  concerning  two  Member  States’ 
legislation and practice on access to transport discounts by pensioners drawing their pensions 
from a non national system and on the legislation of another Member State on access to social 
assistance by inactive persons. 

Infringement procedures for non-compliance or incorrect application of the Directives 

The most relevant cases concerned the following questions: 

Residence visa 

Following the judgment of 14.4.2005 (see point 2), the Commission decided to send a letter of 
formal  notice  on  the  basis  of  Article  228  EC  to  Spain  on  13.12.2005.  Although  the 
requirement  of  a  residence  visa  from  family  members  who  are  third  country  nationals  has 
been discontinued by way of administrative instructions, the judgment of the Court cannot be 
considered to be correctly executed as long as the contested provision of national legislation 
has not been formally amended. 

Proof  of  resources  under  Directive  93/96  and  separate  proof  of  resources  from  family 
members 

Under Directive 93/96 as interpreted by the case law of the Court of Justice in particular in its 
judgments of 25.5.2000 in case C-424/98 Commission v Italian Republic and of 20.9.2001 in 
case C-184/99, Grzelczyck, Member States may not require students benefiting from Directive 
93/96 to provide evidence or a guarantee of a given amount of resources, but must be satisfied 
with  a  declaration  or  other  equivalent  means,  at  the  choice  of  the  student,  assuring  the 
relevant authorities that he disposes of sufficient resources for him and his family members. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
The Commission decided to send a reasoned opinion to Italy on 13.12.2005 with regard to the 
Decree  of  the  President  of  the  Republic  of  18.1.2002  n°  54  on  the  grounds  that  this  text  is 
contrary  to  Directive  93/96  in  that  it  provides  that  students  must  provide  proof  that  they 
dispose of sufficient resources and contrary to the three Directives in that it requires family 
members  to  present  proof  of  sufficient  res  ources  separate  to  that  presented  by  the  Union 
citizen. 

The  Commission  decided  to  close  on  14.12.2004  an  infringement  case  brought  against 
France. A reasoned opinion had been sent on 19.12.2002 by the Commission concerning the 
requirement imposed by Decree n° 94-211 of  11.3.1994  and by a circular  of 19.6.1999  that 
students  must  assure  the  relevant  authorities  that  they  have  at  their  disposal  of  a  specific 
amount of resources and the practice of requiring proof of a bank account from students. The 
case was closed given that France had adopted Law 2003-1119 of 26.11.2003 suppressing the 
obligation  for  all  Union  citizens  to  obtain  a  residence  card  and  had  modified  the  contested 
provisions. 

The Commission also decided on 30.3.2004 to close a case of incorrect application of national 
transposition  measures  by  the  Netherlands,  in  which  a  German  student  was  refused  a 
residence  card  because  he  had  not  provided  proof  of  a  bank  account.  Following  the 
Commission’s intervention the student was granted a residence card without such proof.  

Source and durability of resources under Directive 90/364 

As confirmed by the Chen judgment, Directive 90/364 does not lay down any requirement as 
to  the  origin  of  the  sufficient  resources  required  from  a  Union  citizen  claiming  a  right  of 
residence under this Directive. 

The Commission sent a reasoned opinion to the Netherlands on 3.4.2003, inter alia, because 
its national legislation requires that the Union citizens dispose of durable sufficient resources 
for  a  minimum  period  of  one  year  and  that  the  resources  be  personal.  The  Commission 
services are considering referral to the Court. 

An  action  against  Belgium  was  brought  before  the  Court  of  Justice  on  30.9.2003  (case-
408/03)  by  the  Commission  for  failure  to  fulfil  its  obligations  under  Article  18  EC  and 
Directive 90/364 by making the right of residence of Union citizens subject to the condition 
that they have sufficient personal resources. The opinion of the Advocate General presented 
on 25.10.2005 upheld the Commission’s position. 

A second infringement procedure is open against Belgium on a complaint on this question. 

On 18.10.2004 the Commission sent a formal notice to Luxembourg concerning the complaint 
of a German national who was refused a right of residence under Directive 90/364 on grounds 
that  she  did  not  have  personal  resources,  although  both  her  parents  and  her  fiancé’s  mother 
had agreed to cover her expenses. Luxembourg’s reply is under examination. 

Consequences of recourse to social assistance 

As confirmed by the Court of Justice in the Grzelczyck and the Trojani cases, Member States 
may  consider  that  a  beneficiary  of  Directives  90/364  or  93/96  who  has  recourse  to  social 
assistance  no  longer  fulfils  the  conditions  of  his  right  of  residence  and  may  take  measures, 
within the limits imposed by Community law, either to withdraw his residence permit or not 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
to renew it. Nevertheless, in no case may such measures become the automatic consequence 
of a Union citizen who is a student or inactive having recourse to the social assistance system. 

In its abovementioned reasoned opinion to the Netherlands dated 3.4.2003, the Commission 
considered  that  the  Dutch  legislation  which  provides  that  if  a  Union  citizen  has  recourse  to 
social  assistance  his  right  of  residence  is  refused  or  automatically  suspended  is  contrary  to 
Directive 90/364. 

Documents required to issue a residence card or to change the address therein 

According to the case law of the Court of Justice (case C-363/89 Roux, of 5.2.1991 and case 
C-376/89 Giagounidis, of 5.3.1991), entry and residence requirements for Union citizens who 
exercise  their  right  to  free  movement  and  for  their  family  members,  are  included  in  the 
relevant  provisions  of  Community  law  and  have  exhaustive  character,  in  the  sense  that  the 
only  documents  that  can  be  required  by  the  authorities  of  the  Member  States  are  the  ones 
expressly foreseen by the applicable Community legislation. 

A formal notice was sent to France on 18.10.2004  concerning the requirements  imposed  by 
the French authorities on Union citizens and their family members, on the basis of a Circular 
of 6.12.2000, to present a series of documents proving their civil status and their domicile in 
order to obtain a residence card and concerning a complaint regarding similar requirements in 
order to change the address in the residence card. A complementary formal notice was sent on 
12.12.2005 because the Circular continues to be in force even if the contested practices have 
been discontinued and the legislation still foresees the issue of a residence card if the Union 
citizen so requests. 

A  formal  notice  was  sent  to  Spain  on  21.12.2005  concerning  its  requirement  to  a  retired 
British pensioner who spends more than three months per year in Spain but does not wish to 
transfer  his  residence  definitely  to  Spain,  to  submit  a  form  121  provided  under  Regulation 
1408/71 in order to obtain a residence card in Spain. The Commission considers that this is 
contrary to Directive 90/365 which does not require any specific form of sickness insurance in 
order to obtain a residence card. This is also contrary to Regulation 1408/71 which provides 
that for temporary stays a pensioner may rely on form 111. This form was replaced as from 
June 2004 by the European Health insurance card. 

Automatic order to the leave the territory in case of non production of documents within 
a time limit 

In  the  action  against  Belgium  brought  before  the  Court  of  Justice  on  30.3.2003  in  case  C-
408/03,  the  Commission  asked  the  Court  to  declare  that  Belgium  had  failed  to  fulfil  its 
obligations,  inter  alia,  under  Directive  90/364  by  providing  for  the  possibility  to  give 
automatic  notification  of  an  order  to  leave  the  country  to  Union  citizens  who  have  not 
produced the documents necessary to obtain a residence permit within a prescribed period. 

Discriminatory penalties for failure to obtain or renew a residence card 

An  action  against  Spain  was  brought  before  the  Court  of  Justice  on  7.3.2003  by  the 
Commission (case C-108/03) for failure to fulfil its obligations, inter alia, under Articles 39, 
43  and  49  EC  inasmuch  as  non-Spanish  Union  citizens  in  Spain  are  treated,  as  regards  the 
degree of fault and scale of fines for infringement of provisions relating to residence permits, 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
disproportionately different from Spanish nationals who commit the comparable infringement 
of the obligation to obtain or renew national identity documents. 

In its reply to the Commission’s application to the Court, Spain submitted that it had notified 
to the Commission the adoption of Royal Decree 178/2003 of 14.2.2003 which suppressed the 
obligation  for  Union  citizens  except  for  inactive  persons  to  obtain  a  residence  card.  The 
Commission decided to withdraw this case on 22.7.2003. 

Permanent residence card – discrimination on grounds of nationality 

An  action  against  France  was  brought  before  the  Court  of  Justice  by  the  Commission  on 
17.6.2003 (case C-258/03) on the grounds that by making the grant of a permanent residence 
permit to nationals of the other Member States under Decree 94-221 of 11.3.1994 subject to a 
condition of reciprocity, France had failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 12 of the EC 
Treaty. 

France  suppressed  the  condition  of  reciprocity  by  way  of  abovementioned  Law  2003-1119 
and the Commission decided to withdraw this case on 30.3.2004. 

Cost of residence cards 

Following  the  amendment  of  Law  n°  2910/2001,  the  Commission  decided  to  close  on 
7.7.2004  an  infringement  against  Greece  on  the  cost  of  residence  cards  which  was 
discriminatory with regard to the cost of national identity documents. 

4. 

OVERVIEW OF TRANSPOSITION MEASURES IN THE NEW MEMBER STATES 

The ten new Member States adopted their transposition measures before accession. The last of 
the  national  transposition  measures  was  notified  to  the  Commission  in  January  2005.  No 
complaints  were  received  during  the  reference  period  concerning  the  application  of  the 
Directives by these Member States. 

A table with an overview of the national transposition measures is included in the Annex. 

5. 

THE NEW DIRECTIVE 2004/38 - MAIN INNOVATIONS  

During the period of reference, the single most important development was the adoption by 
the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  of  Directive  2004/38  which  marks  a  major  step 
forward  in  the  evolution  of  the  right  of  free  movement  from  simple  economic  right  to  the 
concrete expression of a real Union citizenship.  

It  brings  together  in  a  single  instrument  the  Community  acquis  on  free  movement  and 
residence,  including  the  three  Directives,  giving  this  right  more  transparency  and  making  it 
easier to apply, both for Union citizens and for national administrations.  

The deadline for transposition is 30.4.2006. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
The main innovations brought by the Directive are the following: 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

It  extends  Union  citizens’  family  reunification  rights  to  a  registered  partner  and 
grants new rights to family members in the event of death of the Union citizen or the 
dissolution of marriage or registered partnership. 

It  facilitates  the  right  of  free  movement  by  reducing  the  formalities  linked  to  its 
exercise. Union citizens and their family members may reside for a period of up to 
three months without any conditions or formalities other than the requirement to hold 
a valid identity card or passport. 

For  periods  of  residence  of  more  than  three  months,  Union  citizens  will  no  longer 
need  to  obtain  a  residence  permit  in  the  Member  State  of  residence:  a  simple 
registration with the competent authorities will be enough, and even this will only be 
required  if  it  is  deemed  necessary  by  the  host  Member  State.  These  steps  towards 
reducing the burden of bureaucracy are in line with moves already taken by several 
Member States to abolish the requirement for a residence permit. 

The  Directive  maintains  the  requirement  that  Union  citizens  need  to  exercise  an 
economic  activity  or,  in  the  case  of  economically  inactive  persons,  to  dispose  of 
sufficient  resources  and  a  comprehensive  sickness  insurance  in  order  to  take  up 
residence in another Member State. 

The  essential  innovation  of  the  Directive,  in  particular  for  economically  inactive 
persons,  is  that  after  five  years  of  continued  legal  residence  in  the  host  Member 
State,  Union  citizens  and  their  family  members  acquire  a  right  of  permanent 
residence  which  will  no  longer  be  submitted  to  conditions.  This  right  constitutes  a 
clear expression of a European citizenship. 

The  Directive  expressly  confirms  the  right  of  Union  citizens  and  their  family 
members  residing  in  the  territory  of  the  host  Member  State  under  the  Directive  to 
equal treatment with the nationals of that Member State. 

Two derogations to this right have been foreseen: the host Member State shall not be 
obliged  to  confer  entitlement  to  social  assistance  during  the  first  three  months  of 
residence to students and other inactive persons, nor shall it be obliged, prior to the 
acquisition of the right of permanent residence, to grant maintenance aid for studies 
in the form of grants or loans to these same persons. 

Finally, the Directive limits the scope for Member States to end the right of residence 
of  Union  citizens  and  their  family  members  on  grounds  of  public  policy,  public 
security  and  public  health  and  on  grounds  of  non  compliance  with  residence 
conditions. It provides expressly that an expulsion measure shall not be the automatic 
consequence of a Union citizen’s or a family member’s recourse to social assistance 
in the host member State. 

It increases the protection against expulsion on grounds of public policy and public 
security  of  Union  citizens  and  their  family  members  who  have  acquired  a  right  of 
permanent  residence  and  limits  the  possibility  of  expulsion  of  Union  citizens  who 
have resided in a Member State for the previous ten years or who are minors to cases 
based on imperative grounds of public security. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
It reinforces the existing  procedural guarantees against  expulsion and  extends  them 
to cases of expulsion on grounds of non compliance with the residence conditions. 

In  order  to  ensure  that  Union  citizens  are  adequately  informed  of  their  rights,  the  Directive 
requires Member States to inform citizens on the  rights arising from it, particularly through 
awareness raising campaigns. With this same purpose, the Commission has published on its 
website  a  compilation  of  relevant  legislation  including  a  comparison  of  the  current  acquis 
with the Directive5. 

In  order  to  monitor  transposition  by  Member  States  and  to  assist  them  with  this  task,  the 
Commission  has  convened  two  meetings  with  Member  States’  experts  in  June  2005  and 
January 2006. 

6. 

CONCLUSION 

At  the  end  of  the  reference  period,  fifteen  years  after  the  adoption  of  the  Directives  on  the 
right of residence of inactive Union citizens, their application is basically satisfactory as the 
declining number of infringements shows. However, the national implementation measures of 
six Member States are still subject to infringement procedures for non conformity or incorrect 
application, due, mainly, to restrictive interpretation of the Directives. During this period, the 
Commission  also  received  complaints  which  could  be  solved  in  many  instances  before 
initiating infringement procedures. 

Systems  such  as  the  SOLVIT  network6,  EUROPE  DIRECT7  and  the  Citizens’  Signpost 
Service8 continued to serve as invaluable tools to help citizens resolve cases requiring rapid 
solutions  which  the  constraints  imposed  by  infringement  procedures  cannot  ensure  or  to 
obtain useful information. 

The new Directive 2004/38 improves the current legislation and provides a solution to many 
of the specific problems encountered with regard to the application of the three Directives in a 
number of ways: it provides a single, simple legal instrument on the fundamental right of free 
movement  and  residence  which  is  the  most  visible  right  attached  to  Union  citizenship;  it 
facilitates the right of residence through a reduction of administrative formalities and related 
expenses and the introduction of a right of permanent residence after five years of residence in 
the  host  Member  State  which  will  not  only  be  unconditional  but  will  also  ensure  full  equal 
treatment  of  economically  inactive  Union  citizens  with  nationals.  It  limits  the  scope  for 
expulsion  of  Union  citizens  and  their  family  members.  Finally,  the  judgments  of  the  Court 
and the incorporation into the Directive of the clarifications therein will help prevent future 
infringements. 

The Commission is closely monitoring progress in the transposition of this Directive and will 
give the utmost priority to ensuring that it is correctly transposed into national law. 

5 
6 
7 
8 

http://europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/doc_centre/citizenship/movement/doc/free_movement_281004_en.pdf 
http://europa.eu.int/comm./internal_market/solvit 
http://europa.eu.int/europedirect/index_en.htm. Free phone number 00 800 67 89 10 11. 
http://europa.eu.int/citizensrights/signpost/front_end/index_en.htm. 

EN 

10 

   EN