Source: http://cmr.jur.ru.nl/CMR/Qs/family/spain/
Timestamp: 2017-07-22 16:35:24
Document Index: 372683329

Matched Legal Cases: ['art. 2', 'art. 2', 'art. 2', 'art. 34', 'art. 45', 'art. 43', 'art. 43', 'art. 35', 'art. 43', 'art. 43', 'art. 96', 'art. 96', 'art. 96', 'art. 57', 'art. 96', 'art. 7', 'art. 318', 'art. 41', 'art. 114', 'art. 116', 'art. 78', 'art. 8', 'art. 53', 'in fine']

CMR Questionnaires: Family Reunification Directive: Spain
Documentation Database: Questionnaires: Family Reunification Directive 2003/86/EC Spain
Data by Spain (26/04/2007)
LEY 5/1984, de 26 de marzo, reguladora del derecho de asilo y de la condición de refugiado, modificada por la Ley 9/1994, de 19 de mayo. (Asylum Law 5/1984, amended by Law 9/1994). REAL DECRETO 203/1995, de 10 de febrero, por el que se aprueba el reglamento de aplicación de la ley 5/1984, de 26 de marzo, reguladora del derecho de asilo y de la condición de refugiado. (Implementation Rules of Asylum Law 5/1984, amended by Law 9/1994). However, none of these legal acts contains a reference to the Directive 2003/86/EC. In particular, the reform made to the LO 4/2000 by the LO 14/2003 dated the 30th November, after the approval of the Directive, and even if mention is made to family reunification in the “Preliminary recitals”, no reference appears regarding Directive 2003/86. This could constitute, from our point of view, an infringement of article 20 of the Directive, which makes it compulsory to make references to the European act at the time of its transposition into national law.
A: We are not aware of any kind of public debate on this issue in our country. Answers on this question by other countries:
A: We refer to the first question (A.1), taking into account that there has not been a formal and expressed implementation of the Directive into Spanish legislation. Answers on this question by other countries:
A: Some judgements of Spanish Courts make references to Directive 2003/86. However, these references are not relevant, since most of them merely refer to the Directive as the present rules on family reunification at European level. Sometimes it is an individual party who invokes the act, but the Court does not pronounce itself on the question. In other cases, it is the Court which mentions the Directive as the present regulation of the right for family reunification. In our opinion, these decisions lack relevance in terms of application or interpretation of the Directive.
Sentencia del Tribunal Constitucional (Sala 2ª), 41/2006, de 13 de febrero: recurso de amparo; discriminatory dismissal for sexual orientation. The Court quotes some European acts containing protection against discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation. Among those acts, mention is made of Directive 2003/86. Sentencia del Tribunal Superior de Justicia de la Comunidad Valenciana (Sala de lo Contencioso-Administrativo), 1334/2005, de 14 de julio: refusal of visa exemption. The appealing party alleges the Directive 2003/86. Rejection of the appeal on formal grounds.
Sentencia del Tribunal Superior de Justicia (Sala de lo Contencioso-Administrativo) de Madrid, 914/2005, de 30 de mayo: refusal of visa for family reunification. Invoked by the appealing party. Sentencia del Tribunal Superior de Justicia (Sala de lo Contencioso-Administrativo) del País Vasco, 94/2005, de 11 de febrero: refusal of temporary residence permit. Reference made by the Court. Sentencia del Tribunal Superior de Justicia (Sala de lo Contencioso-Administrativo) del País Vasco, 1100/2004, de 10 de diciembre: refusal of visa exemption and temporary residence permit. Reference made by the Court.
A: Since Spanish legislation does not contain any rules in relation to article 4 (final subparagraph of 4.1 and 4.6) of the Directive and has not made use of the exceptions allowed by that article before the date of implementation, we have to say that the judgment of the ECJ of 27 June 2006 has no effects on the national practice.
A: According to article 16.2 LOE, aliens with residence in Spain have the right to family reunification. The sponsor may file a family reunification application when he/she has resided legally in Spain during one year and has a residence permit for at least one more year (article 18.2 LOE and 42 RLOE). However, it is not necessary to have the renewed residence permit at the moment of the application, but the latter can be already filed if the residence permit renewal has been requested but not granted yet. Nevertheless, the family reunification permit will not be granted until the effective renewal of the sponsor’s residence permit or after the period understood as positive silence. Neither the LOE nor the RLOE mention the clause “reasonable prospects of obtaining the right of permanent residence”. [The Spanish law provides that an alien who can prove that he/she has resided legally and permanently in Spain during 5 years has the right to obtain a permanent resident permit (article 72 RLOE).] However, in our opinion, the conditions required by Spanish legislation which has been described above could be considered as more favourable than the clause of article 3.1 of the Directive. Answers on this question by other countries:
A: When a third country national also has Spanish nationality, the effective nationality which must be taken into account is the Spanish one. Therefore, as we explain in the next question, the applicable regime will be the one established for citizens of the European Union. This regime is regulated in Spain by Royal Decree 178/2003, 14 February, on entry and residence in Spain of nationals of Member States of the EU and other States of the EEA (BOE No. 46, 22 February 2003).
A: The regime of citizens of the Union has been established in Spain by Royal Decree 178/2003, 14 February, on entry and residence in Spain of nationals of Member States of the EU and other States of the EEA (BOE no. 46, 22 February 2003). This regime is also applicable to third country national family members of Spanish citizens (article 2 of Royal Decree 178/2003), even though Spaniards have not exercised the freedom of movement inside the EU.
Spouse: only not being legally separated (the general regime lays down that the spouse must not be separated de facto neither) [art. 2.a Royal Decree]; Relatives in descending line: under 21 or over 21 but dependant on the sponsor (the general regime lays down the rule of family members under 18 or over 18 if they are handicapped) [art. 2.b Royal Decree]; Relatives in ascending line: they must be dependant on the sponsor (the general regime adds that there must be also reasons justifying the need to authorize their residence in Spain) [art. 2. c) Royal Decree].
Besides, the more privileged treatment becomes evident regarding administrative requirements. Family members of Spanish citizens are required to obtain a stay visa in order to enter Spanish territory (not a residence one: Royal Decree 178/2003 in its original version required a residence visa to be annexed to the residence card application, stipulating the possibility of visa exemption to minor or handicapped children, spouses and relatives in the ascending line of Spanish or other EU and EEA citizens (article 11.3.C). Nevertheless, according to the judgement of the European Court of Justice of 14 April 2005, the condition of a residence visa has been declared non applicable and replaced by the requisite of a stay visa, taking always into account EC Regulation nº 539/2001. ), with the exception of those nationals of third countries included in Annexe 2 of Council Regulation (EC), nº 539/2001 of 15 March 2001, listing the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt from that requirement. Concerning the spouse of a Spanish citizen, he/she does not need to prove stable long-term cohabitation. The only condition to enter Spain is to prove the existence of an effective conjugal bond. (Concerning the possible protection of the situation of unmarried partners and even if they are not covered by RD 178/2003, it seems that some judicial decisions try to cover the question. However, there are divergent opinions in judicial decisions dealing with the possibility of exempting unmarried partner from visa requirements in order to reside in Spain with a citizen, that is to say, before the judgement of ECJ of 14 April 2005 (Decision of Juzgado de lo Contencioso-Administrativo núm. 13 de Barcelona, de 14 de mayo de 2004 answers affirmatively; on the contrary, decision of the Juzgado de lo Contencioso-Administrativo núm. 3 in Pamplona, of April 16, 2004, denies the exemption of visa to the unmarried partner of a Spanish citizen). See Annexe to the Spanish report where this question has been solved by the new Royal Decree 240/2007.) Answers on this question by other countries:
A: The right to family reunification of spouses and minor children has been codified in national law. According to article 17 of LOE and article 39 RLOE, a third country national with residence in Spain has the right to family reunification in relation to the following family members:
a)	The sponsor’s spouse, if they are not separated legally or de facto or when the marriage has not been carried out in legal fraud. It is not possible to authorise the family reunification of another spouse, although the national law of the alien accepts polygamous marriage. b)	The minor children of the sponsor and of his/her spouse, including adopted children, if they are under 18 years old or they are handicapped in accordance with Spanish law or their national law. None of them can be married. Children only of the sponsor or only of his/her spouse have to be under his/her custody, which must not be shared. Besides, children should be dependant on him or her. Regarding adopted children, they must have been adopted in accordance with a decision which takes effect in Spain.
A: This rule does not exist in Spanish legislation.
A: As Spanish legislation did not contain such provisions before the date of implementation, it would not be possible to use these exceptions in our country. Answers on this question by other countries:
A: In Spanish law, the sponsor has no right to family reunification regarding unmarried partners. Articles 17.1(a) LOE and 39(a) RLOE only mention the term “spouse” as the person having a marriage relationship. A legal reform to implement the provision of the Directive on the admission of unmarried partners should be adopted by the Spanish authorities. Unmarried couples are not against public order in Spain and Spanish case-law gives the same treatment to married and unmarried couples in relation to family reunification (Decisions of Supreme Court –Tribunal Supremo- of 14 February 1997 and 15 December 1998, 3 March 1999 (6337/95); 11 October 1999 (10/96); 15 November 1999 (5413/96); 6 June 2000, RJ 6119; etc.). Nevertheless, it must be pointed out that the Supreme Court has only established that couples who reside in Spain should not be separated. That is to say, this criteria is applied only to refuse the expulsion of an unmarried partner already residing in Spain, but the argument has not been used yet to admit an unmarried partner in our country for family reasons.
Does the national law require a minimum age for the admission of spouses that is higher than 18 years? If so what is the minimum age? answer Spain
A: The Spanish law does not require a minimum age for the admission of spouses older than 18. On the contrary, article 48 of the Civil Code allows the marriage of minors over 14 years old, provided that a judicial permission is adopted. Answers on this question by other countries:
What kind of documentary evidence has to be presented with a family reunification application? answer Spain
A: Article 42.2 RLOE lays down the documentary evidence that has to be presented together with the family reunification application:
Documentary evidence of the sponsor’s residence permit or residence and employment permit, together with the renewed one, or his/her application for renewal. Documentary evidence proving the existence of an employment and/or economic resources sufficient to cover the family’s needs, and medical care if it is not covered by the social assistance system. The amounts of the economic resources and who the resources may belong to are not specified. The amounts shall be established by Ministerial Order. Nevertheless, there could be a problem of legal certainty due to this lack of clarity in the norms. At the same time, it is not possible to find or have access to the order by which the Presidency Minister has had to determine the amount of resources required and the possible ways to prove these (article 42. 2. d) RLOE). Documentary evidence proving the existence of accommodation regarded as sufficient for the sponsor and his/her family. A report must be provided by the City Council on the sponsor’s place of residence. The time limit for this report is 15 days. Instead of the report, an affidavit (“acta notarial”) can be provided. The report or the affidavit shall mention the number of persons who live in the house and the general conditions of accommodation. Concerning the reunification of the spouse, the sworn statement of the sponsor that there is not another spouse living with him/her in Spain is required.
A: First of all, we must point out that in Spanish legislation only the sponsor can file an application for a residence permit on the grounds of family reunification. Concerning fees, the applicant (the sponsor) must not pay any at the time of filing the application for family reunification.
Once there is a positive decision regarding both the family reunification application and the visa, it is the family member who has to pay fees in order to obtain the document granting him/her the residence permit on the grounds of family reunification. The amount is of approximately €18. (Information provided by a legal advisor on asylum and aliens law.) The Spanish regime on family reunification only specifies that the sponsor has to pay fees when he/she obtains the renewal of his/her residence permit or the new alien’s identity card (article 44.6 RLOE). Answers on this question by other countries:
A: Spanish legislation does not specify that the family member must be outside Spanish territory when the application is filed, but since a visa is required to enter the territory, we understand that the family member must be outside Spain. However, according to article 5.3 of the Directive, the Spanish legislation establishes two possible exceptions (article 42.6 RLOE): the minor children or handicapped children of the sponsor who have lived in Spain two years in a permanent fashion (article 94.2 RLOE);
A: According to the Eleventh Additional Provision of the RLOE, the residence permit applications on the grounds of family reunification shall be examined under a preferential procedure.
A: In the Spanish legal order, there is a clear obligation to respect the “best interest of minor children”, by virtue of the Convention on the Rights of the Child of 1989 and also according to Organic Law on the Legal Protection of Minors of 1996. Therefore, we consider that Law on Aliens does not need to expressly mention this principle in family reunification provisions (Nevertheless, the principle of the “best interest of the child” is expressly mentioned in other sections of the LOE and RLOE as for instance regarding repatriation of minor children (article 92.4 RLOE).), as it constitutes a general obligation which must be taken into account in everything related to minors, obviously including family reunification.
A: In order to obtain the visa for family reunification purposes, article 43.2.b) RLOE requires that the family member have a clean criminal record, issued by the country of residence during the last five years, proving that he/she has not been sentenced for having comitted a crime according to Spanish legislation.
A: The applicable regime to third country nationals who are family members of EU citizens (Spanish citizens included) is regulated by Royal Decree 178/2003, 14 February, on entry and residence in Spain of nationals of Member States of the EU and other States of the EEA (BOE no. 46, 22 February 2003). According to this regime and comparing it with the one mentioned above, there are some similarities:
On the other hand, we can observe some relevant differences. Firstly, any measure refusing the entry into Spanish territory, refusing the issue or renewal of the residence permit or ordering the expulsion, for reasons of public policy, public security or public health, can only be based on the personal behaviour of the individual (article 16.1 and 16.2 RD 178/2003). Secondly, according to the ECJ judgement of 31 January 2006 [C-503/03, Commission v. Kingdom of Spain , OJ C 21, 24.01.2004], the public policy exception regarding the inclusion of an alien in the Schengen Information System (SIS) must receive a restrictive interpretation, as far as third country nationals who are spouses of Spanish citizens are concerned. As a consequence, a Member State, willing to refuse an entry based on the SIS, should verify whether the presence of these persons constitutes a “genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society”. This interpretation does not apply to third country nationals who are family members of an alien, but only to those third country nationals who are family members of EU citizens. Answers on this question by other countries:
How is the income requirement specified in the national law? answer Spain
A: Article 42.2 of RLOE lays down the documentary evidence that shall be presented together with the family reunification application. Among them, the existence of an employment and/or economic resources sufficient to cover the family’s needs must be proved and medical care if it is not covered by the social assistance system. The amounts of neither the economic resources nor who the resources may belong to are specified. The amounts shall be established by Ministerial Order. Nevertheless, there could be a problem of legal certainty due to this lack of clarity in the norms. At the same time, it is not possible to find or have access to the order by which the Presidency Minister has had to determine the amount of resources required and the possible ways to prove these (article 42. 2. d) RLOE). The Spanish legislation does not mention the need to take into account “stable and regular” economic resources, although it is established by article 7.1 (c) of the Directive.
A: At the moment, the Ministerial Order which should have been adopted according to article 42.1.d) RLOE does not exist yet. However, according to the administrative practice (Information provided by a legal advisor on asylum and alien law), the monthly income required is at least €900. The practice shows that, apart from requiring this level of income, an employment contract is required, although not necessarily indefinite. A temporary contract seems to be accepted.
A: Article 42.2 of RLOE lays down the documentary evidence that shall be presented with a family reunification application. Among the documents that must be attached to the family reunification application, documentary evidence proving the existence of accommodation regarded as sufficient for the sponsor and his/her family is required [article 42.2 RLOE].
In this regard, a report of the City Council of the sponsor’s residence place must be provided. The time limit for this report is 15 days. Instead of it, an affidavit can be provided. The report or the affidavit shall mention the number of persons who live in the house and the general conditions of accommodation, but it is not compulsory to meet any specific accommodation standard (contrary to the previous RLOE, approved by Royal Decree 864/2001, which required some standards regarding, for instance, electricity, running water, etc). The sponsor can be the owner or the tenant of the house. Answers on this question by other countries:
Are family members required to comply with integration measures? If so, do they have to comply before or after admission and what are they actually required to do (follow a course, pass a test, etc.) answer Spain
A: Spanish legislation does not require compliance with any integration measure.
A: According to article 18.2 LOE and 42 RLOE, the sponsor may file a family reunification application when he/she has resided legally in Spain during one year and has a residence permit for at least one more year. However, it is not necessary to have the renewed residence permit at the moment of the application, but the latter can be already filed if the residence permit renewal has been requested but not granted yet. Nevertheless, the family reunification permit will not be granted until the effective renewal of the sponsor’s residence permit or after the period understood as positive silence.
We must point out that the LOE and the RLOE shall be understood as the subsidiary applicable rules to refugees, according to the so called unique article of the RLOE. Answers on this question by other countries:
A: Spanish legislation does not grant family extension of the refugee status to the dependants of the refugee in case of marriage or family relationship created after granting refugee status to the sponsor [art. 34 RD 203/1995]. In those cases, the applicable regime will correspond to the most favourable treatment under alien law. Article 45. 3 of the RLOE states that the family members of the refugee in the situation described above may be granted a temporary residence permit on the grounds of exceptional circumstances. Answers on this question by other countries:
A: We understand that other protected persons than Convention refugees do not benefit from the family extension of the protection, given that article 10 Law 5/1984 seems to be only applicable to refugees. Nevertheless, these persons could benefit from family reunification according to LO 4/2000 and RLOE 2393/2004, due to the fact that their residence permit for exceptional circumstances has a duration of one year, which allows them to be entitled to family reunification [art. 45.6 RLOE]. Answers on this question by other countries:
A: Spanish legislation does not make any specific reference to the family of a refugee who is an unaccompanied minor. We may understand that family members of an unaccompanied minor entitled to family extension of asylum are the same as for other refugees. Spanish legislation would be in accordance with the Directive, since article 10 of Law 5/1984 allows the family extension of asylum to first-degree relatives in the ascending line. However, article 10 of this law excludes from family extension of asylum those family members of the refugee who are not dependent on the refugee. Nevertheless, we consider that this will not be applicable to the situation of minors, where the dependence of the relative in the ascending line in relation to the refugee would not be examined due to the “best interest of the child” principle.
A: RD 203/1995 does not contain specific rules on the documentation which must be filed by the refugee in order to prove the family relationship regarding family extension of asylum, nor on the possible alternatives to those documents.
The only reference to documentation is made by article 8.5 of the Asylum Law which stipulates that if the persons for whom family extension of asylum is demanded are on Spanish territory, they must enclose their personal documents to the application [article 8.5 Law of Asylum]. Therefore, we could understand that Spanish legislation is permissive, allowing the filing of documents or evidence other than official documents, but at the same time this absence of regulation implies a broad margin of appreciation by public authorities.
From which requirements for family reunification, mentioned in Article 7 or Article 8, are refugees or their family members explicitly exempted by national law? answer Spain
A: We could say that refugees are exempted from the requirements of article 7 of the Directive in the sense that provisions regarding family extension of asylum do not refer to this kind of conditions. Family extension of asylum is neither subject to a time requirement, according to article 8 [The asylum seeker can apply for family extension of asylum at the moment of his/her own application for asylum, without prejudice to the possibility of requesting the family extension later (articles 8.5 and 27.3 RD 203/1995)]. Answers on this question by other countries:
A: The procedures that must be followed by the family member to obtain the visa are set out in article 43 RLOE.
Some facilities exist in comparison with other types of procedures. They are specified next.
The application is to be filed by the family member personally at the Spanish diplomatic mission or consular office in the country of origin. However, there are some exceptions where a legal representative is allowed to file the application for the visa: a) when there are justified grounds that prevent the displacement of the applicant (distance to the consular office, difficulties of transport, illness or physical condition affecting mobility in a sensible manner) b) minors. [art. 43 RLOE]. Third additional provision of the LOE and Fourth additional provision of RLOE dispose that the presentation by legal representative “may be granted” in these situations, while article 43 RLOE states that the diplomatic mission or consular office “shall accept” the filing by a legal representative in the situations described above when family reunification is concerned, which implies a facility in relation to the general regime. However, it should be added that the possibility of being called for a personal interview could distort the effectiveness of the legal representation, added to the fact that not attending the interview will be considered as abandonment of the procedure [art. 43.3 RLOE]. Among the documents that must be attached to the application are a passport or travel document, valid in Spain and with a minimum validity period of 4 months. It should be pointed out that, as regards other types of visas, the required minimum period of validity is 1 year [e.g. art. 35.2.a) for the temporal residence visa].
The diplomatic mission or consular office shall notify the granting of the visa for family reunification in 2 months maximum [art. 43.5 RLOE]. However, Eighth additional provision of RLOE establishes a maximum period for visa procedures of 1 month with some exceptions of 3 months in the case of a transit visa, stay visa or non lucrative residence visa. In consequence, it is true that a period of 2 months as the one established for family reunification is not the most burdensome for the individual, but if the objective is to “grant every facility for obtaining the required visas” a period of 1 month could have been preferable. (Nevertheless, part of the doctrine considers the Eighth Additional Provision as being applicable to family reunification, which will mean that the maximum period for visa procedure will be of 1 month. However, it should be pointed out that a specific provision of a law or regulation (as art. 43 of RLOE) takes precedence over an additional provision). The eleventh additional provision of RLOE lays down that visa applications and residence permits on family reunification grounds shall have preferential treatment.
A: The general regime which regulates the change of an alien from legal residence status to residence and employment or self-employment status requires a minimum of one year of previous legal residence [art. 96. 1 RLOE]. However, this requirement is not required when admitted family members are concerned [art. 96. 3 RLOE]. The same is applicable to the spouse who is granted an independent temporary residence permit due to the following situations: the break up of the conjugal bond by separation or divorce after 2 years of marital cohabitation in Spain with the sponsor; being a victim of domestic violence once a protection order has been adopted; in the case of the sponsor’s death. Specifically, concerning access to employment, it is necesssary to comply with the employment requirements stated in article 50 RLOE and also that the employer files the application for the permit. These requirements are supposed to be the same as those which the sponsor had to comply with to access employment. Nevertheless, the national situation of employment is not taken into account, neither is the worker’s criminal record in Spain and in previous countries of residence [art. 96.3 RLOE]. [It should be underlined that not requiring the criminal record does not seem to be very coherent with the general regime of the family reunification permit, since a criminal record must be included in the application for the visa on the grounds of family reunification and since a renewal application of the residence permit can be refused because of behaviour contrary to public order (art. 57 LOE; LO 1/1992 on Protection of Public Security).]
Regarding access to self-employment, requirements are set out in article 58 RLOE, and the person’s criminal record is also excluded. Answers on this question by other countries:
A: Apparently, Spanish government has not made use of the exception allowed under article 14.2 of the Directive and it has not imposed a time limitation to access to employment and self-employment [art. 96.3 RLOE]. The order TAS/3698/2006, of 22nd November, enacted by the Ministry for Employment and Social Affairs, lays down the possibility for the titular of a residence permit on the grounds of family reunification to be inscribed as a job seeker in the public services of employment and in job agencies, without any limitation except the validity of the residence permit. This order repeats that there is not a minimum time of previous residence required for family members and that national situation of employment and the criminal record are not taken into consideration. In addition, refugees and family members who have been granted the family extension of the protection are included in this legal instrument, without specifying any condition or requirement.
A: The period of time required by Spanish law to access an autonomous residence permit is five years, according to article 41 RLOE. Other conditions which must also be fulfilled so as to obtain such a permit are the following:
A: There are, however, other possibilities under which family members are entitled to an autonomous residence permit before the five year period elapses.
Spouse: obtaining a permit to work or being in one of the following situations: break up of the conjugal bond by separation or divorce after 2 years of marital cohabitation in Spain with the sponsor; being a victim of domestic violence once a protection order had been adopted; in the case of the sponsor’s death. Children and minors under the legal representation of the sponsor: being of legal age and obtaining a permit to work.
Concerning children, we wonder if the requirement to have the legal age could be discriminatory as concerns Spanish minors or other aliens taking into account that the age when a person is allowed to work (the minimum legal age to access to an employment is 16, although the minor will need a parents’ permit until he is 18 years old. [art. 7, Estatuto de los Trabajadores, RDL 1/1995, de 24 de marzo].) is lower than the legal age of 18. In order to solve this obstacle, it should be noted that, under Spanish legislation, the legal concept of emancipation is equivalent to the legal age. The ways to access emancipation (possible to obtain from 16 years old) are regulated in the Civil Code (articles 314 - 324): marriage, granting by the holder of the parental authority or granting by judicial order. Moreover, emancipation must be registered at the Civil Registry in order to take legal effect as regards third parties (art. 318 CC). However, as the spouse or the children are concerned, they may obtain a permit to work but not be entitled to an autonomous residence permit if, according to the conditions stipulated in the contract, the salary received is lower than the inter-professional minimum wage, at full-time and on an annual basis. [art. 41. 6 RLOE]. Therefore, another condition to obtain the autonomous permit will be that the salary exceeds the pattern described above.
A: Article 44 of RLOE regulates the renewal of residence permits on the grounds of family reunification. According to this provision, the renewal application must be filed together with documents proving the existence of an employment and/or economic resources, sufficient to cover the family’s needs, and medical care. It is not specified who the resources may belong to.
Nevertheless, there could be a problem of legal certainty due to this lack of clarity in the norms. At the same time, it is not possible to find or have access to the order by which the Presidency Minister has had to determine the amount of resources required and the possible ways to prove these (article 42. 2. d)). Answers on this question by other countries:
A: The Directive obliges Member States to authorize the family reunification of the sponsor’s spouse. The Spanish legislation requires the spouse not to be separated de facto or legally, which means that there must be an effective conjugal bond. Therefore, in the case of de facto separation, the permit will not be granted. Nevertheless, we could wonder how it will be possible to prove that the spouses are not separated if they are supposed to be in different countries and will probably not have enough economic resources to travel constantly. On the other hand, the above mentioned article 44 RLOE related to the renewal of residence permits on a family reunification basis does not make any specific reference to family bonds. According to the model of the application form, while a document proving family bonds must be filed on the initial application, nothing is said in this respect as far as the renewal application is concerned. Article 75 RLOE lays down the motives leading to the extinction of the temporary residence permit. Our interest will concentrate on paragraph 2, related to express decisions of extinction, due to the fact that the silence on a renewal application for a family reunification permit is favourable. Letter c establishes the disappearance of the circumstances on which the permit’s granting has been based as a reason leading to the extinction of the permit. That is to say, that the disappearance of a real family relationship may allow for refusal or withdrawal of a residence permit, always at the time of the renewal because there are no periodical controls of the conditions on which the permit has been based.
Concerning the relationship between parents and minors, the condition required by Spanish legislation in order to obtain the family reunification permit or its renewal, according to which family bonds must be proved, is of course applicable to this kind of family relationship too. Answers on this question by other countries:
A: LOE and RLOE stipulate in article 17.1.a) and 39.a) respectively that the marriage between the sponsor and the spouse has not been formalised in legal fraud. Concerning provisions on this issue, there exists an Instruction from the General Direction for Registers and Notaries, of 31 January 2006, related to marriages of convenience. Among the objectives of this kind of marriage, the instruction mentions the aim of “obtaining family reunification of third country nationals”. It adds that these marriages promote infringements of nationality and alien legislation, according to the Council Resolution of 4 December 1997, and they favour illegal immigration.
Regarding a marriage of two aliens, as will be the case in a family reunification situation such as the one examined here, the authenticity of the consent should be examined on the basis of the individuals’ personal law. Therefore, Spanish law will not be applicable, unless the foreign law in question admits a marriage with a simulated consent. In that case, Spanish law will be of application due to public order. Even if the instructions and advice given by this provision are aimed at the Registry Officials, responsible for marriage registrations, we understand that they are also relevant for the public authorities examining the residence permit applications on the grounds of family reunification. It seems that practice is in conformity with the Directive, since the official must assume certain presumptions in favour of authentic marital consent and since an “absolute moral certainty” must be attained by the official in order to refuse registration of the marriage.
A: Neither the RLOE nor the LOE make express reference to the relevant considerations required by article 17 of the Directive. On the one hand, article 75 RLOE concerning the extinction of residence permits, analysed above, does not state anything related to this issue. On the other hand, article 44.4 RLOE refers to the general regime of mandatory leaving established in the LOE. According to this provision, a negative decision concerning the renewal of residence permits on the grounds of family reunification will produce the mandatory leaving of the applicant. It is clear that such a provision should have included that the negative decision must be motivated and the person notified personally, stating the possible appeals and their terms. If the person does not comply with this mandatory leaving within the specified deadline or in 15 days maximum, he/she will be in an irregular situation in Spain, and wil then receive an expulsion order. The provisions of the LOE and RLOE on mandatory leaving do not make references to these relevant considerations, which could be considered as an infringement of article 17 of the Directive. However, judicial practice seems to be in accordance with article 17, since Spanish courts are bound to apply the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights on expulsions. In addition to Spanish case law, this is expressly stated in Memorandum 2/2006 on several aspects of the regime on aliens in Spain, issued by the Attorney General, in relation to expulsions of aliens as a consequence of committing a criminal offence. Therefore, it is also applicable to expulsions ordered on administrative grounds.
A: Spanish legislation complies with article 18 of the Directive, since the right of administrative and judicial review is granted. Article 21 LOE: any act and administrative resolution adopted in relation to aliens shall be subject to appeal according to the law.
Article 65 LOE: the sanctioning administrative resolutions shall be subject to appeal according to the law. The alien who is out of Spanish territory will be able to give notice of pertinent appeals, administrative or judicial, through diplomatic or consular missions, which will refer them to the competent authority. Article 42.4 RLOE: A negative decision on the family reunification application shall be communicated to the sponsor, including the reasons for the refusal. The references made to the applicable law shall be understood as made to Law 30/1992, of 26th November, on Legal Regime of Public Administrations and the Common Administrative Procedure (LRJAP-PAC) and Law 29/1998, of 13th July, on the Litigious-Administrative Jurisdiction (LJCA). Concerning the administrative review (LRJAP-PAC), it is important to make a distinction between acts which imply the end of the administrative channels and those which do not (Tenth Additional Provision RLOE). Among the first ones, the decisions on renewal of residence permits and on “returns” must be included, which means that the proper administrative review against this type of decision is a “recurso de alzada” [art. 114-115 LRJAP-PAC]. Among the second ones, reference must be made to decisions on visa refusal, refusal of residence permit (on the grounds of family reunification as far as we are concerned) and expulsions. Against this type of decisions, the administrative review consists of a “recurso de reposición” [art. 116-117 LRJAP-PAC]. The latter is a voluntary review in the sense that the individual may decide to attack the administrative act directly before the jurisdictional order. Regarding judicial review (LJCA), litigious-administrative actions can be brought against any administrative act which implies the end of the administrative channels. The claimant may try to obtain a declaration by which the act is said not to be in accordance with the law and therefore it is null and void. Moreover, he/she may try to obtain the recognition of an individualised legal situation and the adoption of the pertinent measures which are necessary to restore that situation, even compensation for damages. Therefore, it seems to imply a full review.
However, the general procedure stipulated in the LJCA is excepted in some cases, where a “Procedimiento abreviado”/Abridged proceedings is to be applicable [art. 78 LJCA]. Among those cases, we find precisely every matter related to aliens (“extranjería”). The competent organs are the Courts for Litigious-Administrative proceedings (art. 8.4 LJCA). Besides, we understand that the decisions can be appealed according to articles 81 et seq. of the LJCA. Article 114 of the same law lays down a special procedure for the protection of fundamental rights, which might be applicable to family reunification matters. However, this procedure is only pertinent to those rights granted by articles 14 to 29 of the Spanish Constitution, the core fundamental rights which are protected by the appeal for legal protection (“recurso de amparo”) before the Constitutional Court [art. 53.2 Spanish Constitution]. Now the question is to establish whether the right to family reunification is considered to be one of those core rights or not. There are two possibilities: 1.- to include this right into the right to private and family life, granted by article 18; 2.- to understand it under article 39 which establishes that “public authorities shall ensure the social, economic and legal protection of the family”. In the second case, we are dealing with a guiding principle for social and economic policy, which is not strictu sensu a fundamental right which can be granted “amparo” or legal protection by this special procedure. In our opinion, family reunification should be understood as part of the right to family life, granted by article 18 of the Constitution. This interpretation follows the same line as article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950. The special procedure for the protection of fundamental rights implies preferential proceedings and it can be introduced against a provision, action or act which involves an infringement of the legal order, even power deviation, and therefore it produces a violation of a right with this legal protection. Nevertheless, this action may be used, in our opinion, against negative decisions on renewal residence permits, on refusal of the family reunification permit filed by the sponsor or decisions on expulsion. Probably, it would not be accepted against refusals on the grounds of the irregular presence of the person in Spanish territory. Concerning the active legal standing, we must stress that there is a contradiction between the Spanish version and the English one. The first establishes in its article 18 that Member States shall ensure that the sponsor and his/her family members have the right to introduce judicial or administrative appeals, while the latter states the same thing but as regards the sponsor and/or the members of his/her family […]. The Spanish version seems to be the wrong one, taking into account that other versions coincide with the English one (e.g. Italian, French).
A: Yes. Right to free legal aid is granted to aliens by article 22 of LO 4/2000 and also by article 2.a) of the Law 1/1996, of 10 January, regulating Free Legal Aid. The latter has been modified by Law 16/2005, of 18 July, in order to implement the Directive 2003/8/EC of 27 January 2003 concerning legal aid in cross-border disputes as well as to incorporate some other legal adjustments like the one generated by the judgment of the Spanish Constitutional Court of 22 May 2003.
A: Strengths: The fact that the application for family reunification may be submitted by the third country national residing lawfully in the Member State as well as by his/her family members.
Including unmarried partners in the personal field of the Directive, even if it is not a mandatory clause for Member States. The relevant considerations which must be taken into account according to article 17 of the Directive.
Weaknesses: The great margin of appreciation left to the Member States on the implementation of the Directive.
A: We consider that it may be interesting to add some remarks about the strengths and weakness of our national legislation on family reunification.
The need for legal reform in order to introduce the right of the sponsor to family reunification of his/her unmarried partner. Legal uncertainty regarding the “sufficient resources” required from the sponsor at the first application as well as at the renewal application. The absence of formal transposition of article 17 of the Directive.
Annexe The recent Royal Decree 240/2007, of 16 February, on the entry, free movement and residence in Spain of nationals of EU Member States and other States of the EEA [BOE nº 51, 28.02.2007] constitutes the transposition of the Directive 2004/38/EC and covers the family reunification of Spanish citizens, even if they have not exercised their right to free movement inside the EU. This new legal act has replaced the previous Royal Decree 178/2003.
For this purpose, the Third Final Provision of RD 240/2007 has amended the RLOE, the regulation of the Law on Aliens in order to include a new Additional Provision, the Twentieth to be precise. According to the latter, RD 240/2007 will be applicable to the following family members of a Spanish citizen, irrespective of nationality: Spouse, neither divorced nor legally separated;
If you choose the label 'violation' or 'unclear', please add a footnote with a short explanation. answer Spain
RD 203/1995 does not contain specific rules on the documentation which must be filed by the refugee in order to prove the family relationship regarding family extension of asylum, nor on the possible alternatives to those documents.Therefore, we could understand that Spanish legislation is permissive, allowing to file documents or evidence other than official documents, but at the same time this absence of regulation implies a wide margin of appreciation by public authorities. 13(1)correct transposition
It is true that Spanish legislation grants some kind of facility to obtain visas. However, some aspects could be regulated in a more favourable manner: requiring a period of one month to notify the granting of the visa by the consular office or diplomatic mission or not considering abandonment of the visa procedure in case of not attending the personal interview when legal representation has been accepted. 14(1)correct transposition
Even if the transposition seems to be acceptable, we consider that Spanish legislation should have introduced a provision like the one contained in article 15.3 in fine of the Directive, ensuring the granting of an autonomous residence permit on the grounds of “especially difficult circumstances”.
17no formal transposition