10.9.2018

Official Journal of the European Union

C 319/9

(Case C-89/17) (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Citizenship of the European Union - Article 21 TFEU - Right of Union citizens to move and reside freely within the territory of the European Union - Directive 2004/38/EC - Point (b) of the first subparagraph of Article 3(2) - Partner with whom the Union citizen has a duly-attested durable relationship - Return to the Member State of which the Union citizen is a national - Application for residence authorisation - Extensive examination of the applicant’s personal circumstances - Articles 15 and 31 - Effective judicial protection - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Article 47))

(2018/C 319/10)

Language of the case: English

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Secretary of State for the Home Department

Defendant: Rozanne Banger

Operative part of the judgment

1.Article 21(1) TFEU must be interpreted as requiring the Member State of which a Union citizen is a national to facilitate the provision of a residence authorisation to the unregistered partner, a third-country national with whom that Union citizen has a durable relationship that is duly attested, where the Union citizen, having exercised his right of freedom of movement to work in a second Member State, in accordance with the conditions laid down in Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 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/EEC, returns with his partner to the Member State of which he is a national in order to reside there.

2.Article 21(1) TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that a decision to refuse a residence authorisation to the third-country national and unregistered partner of a Union citizen, where that Union citizen, having exercised his right of freedom of movement to work in a second Member State, in accordance with the conditions laid down in Directive 2004/38, returns with his partner to the Member State of which he is a national in order to reside there, must be founded on an extensive examination of the applicant’s personal circumstances and be justified by reasons.

3.Article 3(2) of Directive 2004/38 must be interpreted as meaning that the third-country nationals envisaged in that provision must have available to them a redress procedure in order to challenge a decision to refuse a residence authorisation taken against them, following which the national court must be able to ascertain whether the refusal decision is based on a sufficiently solid factual basis and whether the procedural safeguards were complied with. Those safeguards include the obligation for the competent national authorities to undertake an extensive examination of the applicant’s personal circumstances and to justify any denial of entry or residence.

Language of the case: English

(1) OJ C 129, 24.4.2017.