natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
15 An appeal against that decision was brought before the Immigration Judge of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal, who held, on 6 April 2009, that the respondents in the main proceedings were indeed ‘dependants’ and, consequently, that their file had to be considered under regulation 17(4) and (5) of the Immigration Regulations.
15 Žalba protiv te odluke podnesena je Immigration Judge of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunalu, koji je 6. travnja 2009. presudio da su tuženici u glavnom postupku stvarno bili „uzdržavanici” i da je stoga njihov spis trebalo razmatrati na temelju članka 17. stavaka 4. i 5. Uredbe o useljavanju.
16 The Secretary of State requested a reconsideration of that decision before the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber). Reconsideration was ordered by decision of 30 April 2009 and the case is before that tribunal as an appeal.
16 Secretary of State je zatražio da Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) preispita navedenu odluku. Preispitivanje je naloženo odlukom od 30. travnja 2009. i predmet je proslijeđen tom sudu kao žalbenom sudu.
17 It was in those circumstances that the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following questions to the Court for a preliminary ruling:
17 U tim je uvjetima Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) odlučio prekinuti postupak i postaviti Sudu sljedeća prethodna pitanja:
‘(1) Does Article 3(2) of [Directive 2004/38] require a Member State to make legislative provision to facilitate entry to and/or residence in a Member State to the class of other family members who are not nationals of the European Union who can meet the requirements of Article 10(2) [of that directive]?
„(1) Zahtijeva li članak 3. stavak 2. [Direktive 2004/38] od države članice da zakonskom odredbom omogući ulazak u državu članicu i/ili boravak u njoj kategoriji drugih članova obitelji koji nisu državljani Europske unije koji mogu ispunjavati uvjete iz članka 10. stavka 2. [Direktive]?
(2) Can such other family member referred to in Question 1 rely on the direct applicability of Article 3(2) of [Directive 2004/38] in the event that he cannot comply with any requirements imposed by national legislative provisions?
(2) Može li se taj drugi član obitelji, o kojemu se govori u prvom pitanju, pozvati na izravnu primjenu članka 3. stavka 2. [Direktive 2004/38] u slučaju da ne može ispuniti nijedan zahtjev propisan odredbama nacionalnog zakonodavstva?
(3) Is the class of other family members referred to in Article 3(2) and Article 10(2) of [Directive 2004/38] limited to those who have resided in the same country as the Union national and his or her spouse, before the Union national came to the host State?
(3) Je li kategorija drugih članova obitelji iz članka 3. stavka 2. i članka 10. stavka 2. [Direktive 2004/38] ograničena samo na one koji su boravili u istoj državi kao i državljanin Unije i njegov bračni drug prije nego što je državljanin Unije došao u državu domaćina?
(4) Must any dependency referred to in Article 3(2) of [Directive 2004/38] on which the other family member relies to secure entry to the host State be dependency that existed shortly before the Union citizen moved to the host State?
(4) Mora li uzdržavanje iz članka 3. stavka 2. [Direktive 2004/38] na koje se drugi član obitelji poziva kako bi osigurao ulazak u državu domaćina biti uzdržavanje koje je postojalo malo prije nego što se državljanin Unije preselio u državu domaćina?
(5) Can a Member State impose particular requirements as to the nature or duration of dependency referred to in Article 3(2) of [Directive 2004/38] by such other family member so as to prevent such dependency being contrived or unnecessary to enable a non-national to be admitted to or continue to reside in its territory?
(5) Može li država članica propisati posebne zahtjeve u pogledu vrste i trajanja uzdržavanja drugog člana obitelji iz članka 3. stavka 2. [Direktive 2004/38] kojima bi spriječila da izmišljeno ili nepotrebno uzdržavanje omogući osobama koje nisu državljani ulazak na njezino područje ili daljnji boravak na njezinom području?
(6) Must the dependency on which the other family member relies in order to be admitted to the Member State continue for a period or indefinitely in the host State for a residence card to be issued or renewed pursuant to Article 10 of [Directive 2004/38] and if so how should such dependency be demonstrated?’
(6) Mora li uzdržavanje na koje se poziva drugi član obitelji kako bi mu se odobrio boravak u državi članici, trajati neko određeno razdoblje ili neodređeno vrijeme u državi domaćinu da bi mu se mogla izdati ili produljiti boravišna iskaznica u skladu s člankom 10. [Direktive 2004/38] i, ako je tako, kako bi se takvo uzdržavanje trebalo dokazati?’
18 With regard to the first and second questions, which it is appropriate to examine together, it should be pointed out at the outset that Directive 2004/38 does not oblige the Member States to grant every application for entry or residence submitted by persons who show that they are family members who are ‘dependants’ of a Union citizen, within the meaning of Article 3(2)(a) of that directive.
18 Kada je riječ o prvom i drugom pitanju, koje valja ispitati zajedno, prije svega valja istaknuti da Direktiva 2004/38 ne obvezuje države članice da udovolje svakom zahtjevu za ulazak ili boravak koji podnesu osobe koje dokažu da su članovi obitelji „uzdržavanici” građanina Unije u smislu članka 3. stavka 2. te direktive.
19 As contended by the governments which have submitted observations to the Court and by the European Commission, it follows both from the wording of Article 3(2) of Directive 2004/38 and from the general system of the directive that the European legislature has drawn a distinction between a Union citizen’s family members as defined in Article 2(2) of Directive 2004/38, who enjoy, as provided for in the directive, a right of entry into and residence in that citizen’s host Member State, and the other family members envisaged in Article 3(2) of the directive, whose entry and residence has only to be facilitated by that Member State.
19 Kao što su navele vlade koje su Sudu podnijele očitovanja i Europska komisija, iz teksta članka 3. stavka 2. Direktive 2004/38 i iz opće strukture te direktive proizlazi da zakonodavac Unije razlikuje između članova obitelji građanina Unije definiranih u članku 2. stavku 2. Direktive 2004/38 koji pod uvjetima koji su utvrđeni u toj direktivi imaju pravo ulaska i boravka u državi članici domaćinu toga građanina i drugih članova obitelji predviđenih člankom 3. stavkom 2. točkom (a) iste direktive kojima ta država članica mora samo olakšati ulazak i boravak.
20 That interpretation is borne out by recital 6 in the preamble to Directive 2004/38, which states that, ‘in order to maintain the unity of the family in a broader sense …, the situation of those persons who are not included in the definition of family members under this Directive, and who therefore do not enjoy an automatic right of entry and residence in the host Member State, should be examined by the host Member State on the basis of its own national legislation, in order to decide whether entry and residence could be granted to such persons, taking into consideration their relationship with the Union citizen or any other circumstances, such as their financial or physical dependence on the Union citizen’.
20 To je tumačenje potkrijepljeno uvodnom izjavom 6. Direktive 2004/38 prema kojoj „[k]ako bi se sačuvalo jedinstvo obitelji u širem smislu […], država članica domaćin trebala bi na temelju svog nacionalnog zakonodavstva ispitati položaj osoba koje nisu obuhvaćene definicijom članova obitelji prema ovoj Direktivi i koje zbog toga ne uživaju automatsko pravo na ulazak u državu članicu domaćina i boravak u njoj, kako bi odlučila može li odobriti ulazak i boravak tim osobama, uzimajući pritom u obzir njihovu vezu s građaninom Unije i sve ostale okolnosti, kao što su njihova financijska ili fizička ovisnost o građaninu Unije”.
21 Whilst it is therefore apparent that Article 3(2) of Directive 2004/38 does not oblige the Member States to accord a right of entry and residence to persons who are family members, in the broad sense, dependent on a Union citizen, the fact remains, as is clear from the use of the words ‘shall facilitate’ in Article 3(2), that that provision imposes an obligation on the Member States to confer a certain advantage, compared with applications for entry and residence of other nationals of third States, on applications submitted by persons who have a relationship of particular dependence with a Union citizen.
21 Iako je očito da članak 3. stavak 2. Direktive 2004/38 ne obvezuje države članice da osobama koje su članovi obitelji u širem smislu i koje uzdržava građanin Unije prizna pravo na ulazak i boravak, iz uporabe prezenta „olakšava” u članku 3. stavku 2. proizlazi da ta odredba nameće državama članicama obvezu da zahtjevima za ulazak i boravak koje podnesu osobe koje su u određenoj ovisnosti o građaninu Unije daju prednost u odnosu na zahtjeve za ulazak i boravak koje podnesu drugi državljani trećih zemalja.
22 In order to meet that obligation, the Member States must, in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 3(2) of Directive 2004/38, make it possible for persons envisaged in the first subparagraph of Article 3(2) to obtain a decision on their application that is founded on an extensive examination of their personal circumstances and, in the event of refusal, is justified by reasons.
22 Kako bi ispunile tu obvezu, države članice moraju, u skladu s člankom 3. stavkom 2. drugim podstavkom Direktive 2004/38, za osobe iz članka 3. stavka 2. prvog podstavka te direktive predvidjeti mogućnost da na svoj zahtjev dobiju odluku koja se temelji na opsežnom ispitivanju njihovih osobnih okolnosti i koja je, u slučaju odbijanja, obrazložena.
23 As is clear from recital 6 in the preamble to Directive 2004/38, it is incumbent upon the competent authority, when undertaking that examination of the applicant’s personal circumstances, to take account of the various factors that may be relevant in the particular case, such as the extent of economic or physical dependence and the degree of relationship between the family member and the Union citizen whom he wishes to accompany or join.
23 Kao što proizlazi iz uvodne izjave 6. Direktive 2004/38, pri ispitivanju osobnih okolnosti podnositelja zahtjeva nadležno tijelo mora uzeti u obzir različite faktore koji u konkretnom slučaju mogu biti bitni, kao što su stupanj ekonomske ili fizičke ovisnosti i stupanj srodstva između člana obitelji i građanina Unije kojega želi pratiti ili mu se pridružiti.
24 In the light both of the absence of more specific rules in Directive 2004/38 and of the use of the words ‘in accordance with its national legislation’ in Article 3(2) of the directive, each Member State has a wide discretion as regards the selection of the factors to be taken into account. None the less, the host Member State must ensure that its legislation contains criteria which are consistent with the normal meaning of the term ‘facilitate’ and of the words relating to dependence used in Article 3(2), and which do not deprive that provision of its effectiveness.
24 S obzirom na nedostatak preciznijih pravila u Direktivi 2004/38 i uporabu riječi „u skladu sa svojim nacionalnim zakonodavstvom” u članku 3. stavku 2. te direktive, valja utvrditi da svaka država članica ima široku marginu prosudbe kod odabira faktora koje će uzimati u obzir. Unatoč tome, država članica domaćin mora osigurati da njezino zakonodavstvo sadržava kriterije koji su u skladu s uobičajenim značenjem izraza „olakšava” i izraza iz navedenog članka 3. stavka 2. koji se odnose na uzdržavanje, a koji tu odredbu ne lišavaju njezina korisnog učinka.
"25 Finally, even though, as the governments which have submitted observations have correctly observed, the wording used in Article 3(2) of Directive 2004/38 is not sufficiently precise to enable an applicant for entry or residence to rely directly on that provision in order to invoke criteria which should in his view be applied when assessing his application, the fact remains that such an applicant is entitled to a judicial review of whether the national legislation and its application have remained within the limits of the discretion set by that directive (see, by analogy, Case C-72/95 Kraaijeveld and Others [1996] ECR I-5403, paragraph 56; Case C-127/02 Waddenvereniging and Vogelbeschermingsvereniging [2004] ECR I-7405, paragraph 66; and Joined Cases C-165/09 to C-167/09 Stichting Natuur en Milieu and Others [2011] ECR I-0000, paragraphs 100 to 103)."
"25 Naposljetku valja istaknuti da iako, kao što su ispravno navele vlade koje su podnijele očitovanja, tekst članka 3. stavka 2. Direktive 2004/38 nije dovoljno precizan da bi podnositelju zahtjeva za ulazak ili boravak omogućio da se izravno oslanja na to odredbu kako bi se pozvao na kriterije koje bi po njegovu mišljenju trebalo primjenjivati u vezi s njegovim zahtjevom, podnositelj zahtjeva ipak ima pravo pred sudom provjeriti jesu li nacionalno zakonodavstvo i njegova primjena u granicama margine prosudbe utvrđene tom direktivom (vidi po analogiji presude od 24. listopada 1996., Kraaijeveld i dr., C-72/95, Zb., str. I-5403., t. 56.; od 7. rujna 2004., Waddenvereniging i Vogelbeschermingsvereniging, C-127/02, Zb., str. I-7405., t. 66. te od 26. svibnja 2011., Stichting Natuur en Milieu i dr., C-165/09 do C-167/09, Zb., str. I-4599., t. 100. do 103.)."
26 In the light of the foregoing, the answer to the first and the second question referred is that, on a proper construction of Article 3(2) of Directive 2004/38:
26 Slijedom navedenoga, na prvo i drugo postavljeno pitanje valja odgovoriti da članak 3. stavak 2. Direktive 2004/38 treba tumačiti na način da:
"– the Member States are not required to grant every application for entry or residence submitted by family members of a Union citizen who do not fall under the definition in Article 2(2) of that directive, even if they show, in accordance with Article 10(2) thereof, that they are dependants of that citizen;"
"– države članice nisu obvezne udovoljiti svakom zahtjevu za ulazak ili boravak koji podnesu članovi obitelji građanina Unije koji nisu obuhvaćeni definicijom iz članka 2. stavka 2. te direktive, čak i ako dokažu, u skladu s člankom 10. stavkom 2. navedene direktive, da ih taj građanin uzdržava;"
"– it is, however, incumbent upon the Member States to ensure that their legislation contains criteria which enable those persons to obtain a decision on their application for entry and residence that is founded on an extensive examination of their personal circumstances and, in the event of refusal, is justified by reasons;"
"– države članice ipak moraju osigurati da njihovo zakonodavstvo sadržava kriterije koji tim osobama omogućuju dobivanje odluke o njihovom zahtjevu za ulazak i boravak koja se temelji na opsežnom ispitivanju njihovih osobnih okolnosti i koja je, u slučaju odbijanja, obrazložena;"
"– the Member States have a wide discretion when selecting those criteria, but the criteria must be consistent with the normal meaning of the term ‘facilitate’ and of the words relating to dependence used in Article 3(2) and must not deprive that provision of its effectiveness; and"
"– države članice imaju široku marginu prosudbe kod odabira tih kriterija, ali ti kriteriji moraju biti u skladu s uobičajenim značenjem izraza „olakšava” i izrazima iz navedenog članka 3. stavka 2. koji se odnose na uzdržavanje i tu odredbu ne smiju lišiti njezina korisnog učinka; i"
– every applicant is entitled to a judicial review of whether the national legislation and its application satisfy those conditions.
– svaki podnositelj zahtjeva ima pravo pred sudom provjeriti ispunjavaju li nacionalno zakonodavstvo i njegova primjena te uvjete.
27 By its third and fourth questions, which should also be examined together, the national tribunal asks in essence whether, in order to fall within the category, referred to in Article 3(2) of Directive 2004/38, of family members who are ‘dependants’ of a Union citizen, it is necessary to have resided in the same State as that citizen and to have been a dependant of that citizen shortly before or at the time when the latter settled in the host Member State.
27 Trećim i četvrtim pitanjem, koje također valja ispitati zajedno, sud koji je uputio zahtjev u biti pita mora li neka osoba, da bi bila svrstana u kategoriju „uzdržavanih” članova obitelji građanina Unije iz članka 3. stavka 2. Direktive 2004/38, boraviti u istoj državi kao i taj građanin i biti uzdržavanik toga građanina malo prije ili u trenutku nastanjivanja potonjeg u državi članici domaćinu.
28 As has been submitted by the Centre for Advice on Individual Rights in Europe (AIRE Centre), the Netherlands Government and the Commission in particular, the wording of Directive 2004/38 does not support the conclusion that family members of a Union citizen who do not fall under the definition in Article 2(2) of that directive and who have duly demonstrated their situation of dependence on that citizen can be excluded from the scope of Article 3(2) of the directive solely because they have not resided in the same State as that citizen.
28 Kao što su istakli osobito Centre for Advice on Individual Rights in Europe (AIRE Centre), nizozemska vlada i Komisija, tekst Direktive 2004/38 ne omogućuje zaključak da članovi obitelji građanina Unije koji nisu obuhvaćeni definicijom iz članka 2. stavka 2. te direktive a propisno su dokazali da ih taj građanin uzdržava mogu biti isključeni iz područja primjene članka 3. stavka 2. navedene Direktive samo zato jer nisu boravili u istoj državi kao i navedeni građanin.
29 Under Article 3(2) of Directive 2004/38, the Member States are to facilitate, in accordance with their national legislation, entry and residence for ‘any other family members … who, in the country from which they have come, are dependants or members of the household of the Union citizen having the primary right of residence’.
29 U skladu s navedenim člankom 3. stavkom 2., države članice olakšavaju, u skladu s nacionalnim zakonodavstvom, ulazak i boravak „bilo kojim drugim članovima obitelji […] koji su u zemlji iz koje dolaze uzdržavanici ili članovi kućanstva građanina Unije, nositelja primarnog prava na boravak”.
30 Also, Article 10(2)(e) of Directive 2004/38, relating to issue of residence cards, authorises the Member States to require family members referred to in Article 3(2) of the directive to present a ‘document issued by the relevant authority in the country of origin or country from which they are arriving certifying that they are dependants … of the Union citizen’.
30 Isto tako, člankom 10. stavkom 2. točkom (e) Direktive 2004/38, koji se odnosi na izdavanje boravišne dozvole, dopušta se državama članicama da od članova obitelji iz članka 3. stavka 2. iste direktive zahtijevaju predočenje „isprave koju je izdalo nadležno tijelo u zemlji podrijetla ili zemlji iz koje dolaze, kojom se potvrđuje da su uzdržavanici […] građanina Unije”.
31 As the Advocate General has explained in points 91, 92 and 98 of his Opinion, there is nothing to indicate that the term ‘country from which they have come’ or ‘country from which they are arriving’ [‘pays de provenance’] used in those provisions must be understood as referring to the country in which the Union citizen resided before settling in the host Member State. On the contrary, it is clear, on reading those provisions together, that the country referred to is, in the case of a national of a third State who declares that he is a ‘dependant’ of a Union citizen, the State in which he was resident on the date when he applied to accompany or join the Union citizen.
31 Kao što je naveo nezavisni odvjetnik u točkama 91., 92. i 98. svojeg mišljenja, ništa ne ukazuje na to da se izraz „zemlja iz koje dolaze”, koji se upotrebljava u tim odredbama, mora shvaćati tako da se odnosi na državu u kojoj je građanin Unije boravio prije nego što se nastanio u državi članici domaćinu. Suprotno tome, iz povezanog čitanja navedenih odredbi proizlazi da je, kad je riječ o državljaninu treće zemlje koji navodi da je „uzdržavanik” građanina Unije, „zemlja iz koje dolaz[i]” država u kojoj je boravio na datum kad je podnio zahtjev da prati građanina Unije ili da mu se pridruži.
32 So far as concerns the time at which the applicant must be in a situation of dependence in order to be considered a ‘dependant’ within the meaning of Article 3(2) of Directive 2004/38, it is to be noted that, as follows from recital 6 in the directive’s preamble, the objective of that provision is to ‘maintain the unity of the family in a broader sense’ by facilitating entry and residence for persons who are not included in the definition of family member of a Union citizen contained in Article 2(2) of Directive 2004/38 but who nevertheless maintain close and stable family ties with a Union citizen on account of specific factual circumstances, such as economic dependence, being a member of the household or serious health grounds.
32 Što se tiče trenutka u kojemu podnositelj zahtjeva mora biti u odnosu ovisnosti da bi ga se moglo smatrati „uzdržavanikom” u smislu članka 3. stavka 2. Direktive 2004/38, valja ustvrditi da je cilj te odredbe, kao što proizlazi iz uvodne izjave 6. navedene direktive, „[sačuvati] jedinstvo obitelji u širem smislu” omogućavanjem ulaska i boravka osobama koje nisu obuhvaćene definicijom članova obitelji građanina Unije iz članka 2. stavka 2. Direktive 2004/38, ali koje ipak imaju bliske i stabilne obiteljske veze s građaninom Unije zbog posebnih činjeničnih okolnosti, kao što su ekonomska ovisnost, zajedničko kućanstvo ili ozbiljni zdravstveni razlozi.
33 It is clear that such ties may exist without the family member of the Union citizen having resided in the same State as that citizen or having been a dependant of that citizen shortly before or at the time when the latter settled in the host State. On the other hand, the situation of dependence must exist, in the country from which the family member concerned comes, at the time when he applies to join the Union citizen on whom he is dependent.
33 Međutim, valja utvrditi da te veze mogu postojati a da član obitelji građanina Unije i nije boravio u istoj državi kao i taj građanin ni bio njegov uzdržavanik malo prije ili u trenutku nastanjivanja potonjeg u državi domaćinu. S druge strane, odnos ovisnosti mora postojati u zemlji iz koje dolazi predmetni član obitelji u trenutku kada podnosi zahtjev da se pridruži građaninu Unije koji ga uzdržava.
34 In the main proceedings, it is for the national tribunal to establish, on the basis of the guidance as to interpretation provided above, whether the respondents in the main proceedings were dependants of the Union citizen, in this instance Mrs Rahman, in the country from which they have come, Bangladesh, at the time when they applied to join her in the United Kingdom. It is only if they can prove that dependence in the country from which they have come, in accordance with Article 10(2) of Directive 2004/38, that the host Member State will have to facilitate their entry and residence in accordance with Article 3(2) of that directive, as interpreted in paragraphs 22 to 25 of the present judgment.
34 U glavnom postupku, sud koji je uputio zahtjev mora na temelju gore iznesenih elemenata tumačenja provjeriti jesu li tuženici u glavnom postupku bili uzdržavanici građanina Unije, u ovom slučaju gospođe Rahman, u zemlji iz koje dolaze, Bangladešu, u trenutku kad su podnijeli zahtjev da joj se pridruže u Ujedinjenoj Kraljevini. Samo ako budu mogli dokazati to uzdržavanje u zemlji iz koje dolaze, u skladu s člankom 10. stavkom 2. Direktive 2004/38, država članica domaćin morat će im omogućiti ulazak i boravak u skladu s člankom 3. stavkom 2. navedene Direktive, kako se tumači u točkama od 22. do 25. ove presude.