Refusal to issue in addition to a passport, an identity card serving as a travel document, on the sole ground that a person is domiciled in another Member State, is contrary to EU law (ECJ)

According to the Judgment of the Court in Case C-491/21 (Direcţia pentru Evidenţa Persoanelor şi Administrarea Bazelor de Date), the refusal by a Member State to issue to one of its nationals, in addition to a passport, an identity card serving as a travel document, on the sole ground that he or she is domiciled in another Member State, is contrary to EU law.

That refusal restricts the right to freedom of movement within the European Union, creating a difference in treatment between citizens domiciled abroad and those domiciled in that Member State.

Since 2014, a Romanian lawyer has been domiciled in France and carries out his professional activities in both France and Romania. In 2017, he applied to the Romanian authorities to be issued with an identity card, whether simple or electronic, as a travel document enabling him to travel to France. That application was rejected on the ground that he was domiciled abroad. Hearing that case, the High Court of Cassation and Justice (Romania) referred a question to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling. 

In its judgment, the Court of Justice holds that the refusal to issue an identity card on the sole ground that the person concerned is not domiciled in Romania constitutes a restriction on the right to move and reside freely within the European Union in respect of Romanian nationals domiciled in another Member State. 

The Romanian legislation establishes a difference in treatment between Romanian citizens domiciled abroad and those who are domiciled in Romania. The former only have a passport as a travel document, while the latter may have an identity card and a passport. EU law (Directive 2004/38/EC on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States) does not require Member States to issue two identity documents that may serve as travel documents to their nationals. 

However, it does not allow the Member States to treat less favourably those nationals who have exercised their right to move and to reside freely within the European Union, without justification based on objective considerations of public interest. Such legislation cannot be justified either by the need to confer probative value on the address of domicile indicated on the identity card, or by the effectiveness of the identification and checking of that address by the competent national authority. (curia.europa.eu/photo: freepik.com)

The full text of the decision is available here

Comments

Post a Comment

Editorial

Editorial
George Kazoleas, Lawyer

Top Stories

Ombudsman inquiry on Commission President’s text messages is a wake-up call for EU

Image
The European Ombudsman inquiry into the Commission’s handling of a request for text messages between its President and the CEO of a pharmaceutical company is a wake-up call for all EU institutions about ensuring accountability in an era of instant messaging. One year after the initial request by a journalist, the Commission has still not clarified whether messages reported to concern major vaccine procurement deals exist and whether the public is entitled to see them. The Ombudsman had asked the Commission, in a finding of maladministration in January, to conduct a more thorough search for the text messages. The Commission’s recent response failed to say whether it had looked directly and correctly for the text messages and if not, why not. While the response recognised that work-related text messages can be EU documents, it reiterated that the Commission’s internal policy is, in effect, not to register text messages. The Ombudsman has closed  the inquiry  and upheld her find
Read more

Daily Mail publisher wins case against ‘success fees’ paid to lawyers (ECtHR)

Image
Obligation on publisher of the Daily Mail to pay substantial “success fees" in defamation and breach of privacy cases was excessive. The case Associated Newspapers Limited v. the United Kingdom (application no. 37398/21) concerned the fact that Associated Newspapers Limited the publisher of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday had been obliged to pay extensive costs incurred by claimants who had successfully sued it in privacy and/or defamation proceedings following articles it had published in print or online in 2017 and 2019.  Since one of the claimants had entered into a conditional fee arrangement (CFA) with his legal representative, and both had taken out “after-the-event” (ATE) insurance, Associated Newspapers Limited had been liable not only for their base costs, but also for fee uplifts including the “success fee” in the CFA and for their ATE insurance premiums.  In Chamber judgment (12.11.2024) in the case, the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that there
Read more

The banks Crédit agricole and Credit Suisse participated in a cartel in the sector for suprasovereign bonds, sovereign bonds and public agency bonds denominated in US dollars

Image
According to the Judgment of the General Court in Cases T-386/21 (Crédit agricole and Crédit agricole Corporate and Investment Bank v Commission) and T-406/21 (UBS Group and Credit Suisse Securities (Europe) v Commission), the banks Crédit agricole and Credit Suisse participated in a cartel in the sector for suprasovereign bonds, sovereign bonds and public agency bonds denominated in US dollars (‘SSA Bonds’).  The General Court of the European Union confirms the Commission’s finding of an infringement and maintains the amount of the fines imposed in 2021. In 2018, the European Commission initiated proceedings for infringement of the competition rules involving Deutsche Bank, Bank of America, Crédit agricole and Credit Suisse (now UBS Group [1] ).  In 2021, the Commission found that those banks had entered into an agreement on the secondary market for suprasovereign, sovereign and agency bonds denominated in dollars (SSA bonds). According to the Commission, traders employed by those ban
Read more

A notary does not breach the sanctions against Russia when he or she authenticates the sale of a property owned by an unlisted Russian company (ECJ)

Image
In tis Judgment in Case C-109/23 (Jemerak) [1] the Court of Justice ruled that a notary does not breach the sanctions against Russia when he or she authenticates the sale of a property owned by an unlisted Russian company.  By authentication, a notary does not provide legal advisory services, but acts independently and impartially in the context of a function entrusted to him or her by the State.  A notary in Berlin (Germany) refused to authenticate a contract for the sale of an apartment situated in Berlin and owned by a Russian company. According to that notary, it cannot be ruled out that that authentication infringes the prohibition on the provision of legal advisory services to legal persons established in Russia. The European Union introduced that general prohibition [2] in 2022 with a view to increase pressure on Russia to end its war of aggression against Ukraine [3] . The Berlin Regional Court referred questions to the Court of Justice on this matter. The Court replies that th
Read more

ECtHR elects a new Vice-President of the Court and two new Section Presidents

Image
The European Court of Human Rights has elected on 23.9.2024 a new Vice-President of the Court – Judge Ivana Jelić (elected in respect of Montenegro). She will take up her duties on 1 November 2024.  The Court has also elected at the same date two new Section Presidents – Judges Lado Chanturia (elected in respect of Georgia) and Ioannis Ktistakis (elected in respect of Greece). They will also take up their duties on 1 November 2024. Ivana Jelić was born on 17 March 1975 in Podgorica, Montenegro and was elected Judge of the European Court of Human Rights on 12 July 2018. Lado Chanturia was born on 14 April 1963 in Tsalenjikha, Georgia, was elected Judge of the European Court of Human Rights on 8 January 2018 and is Vice-President of Section since 18 May 2023. Ioannis Ktistakis was born on 3 January 1971 in Thebes, Greece and was elected Judge of the European Court of Human Rights on 8 March 2021. (source/photo: echr.coe.int) Read more here
Read more

A national court is not required to apply a decision of its constitutional court that infringes EU law (ECJ)

Image
In its Judgment of 26.9.2024 in Case C-792/22 (Energotehnica) the Court of Justice ruled as regards the right to an effective remedy that a national court is not required to apply a decision of its constitutional court that infringes EU law. In such a case, the national court may not be penalised.  Following the death of an electrician by electrocution during a maintenance operation, an administrative procedure was initiated against his employer. At the same time, criminal proceedings for negligence and manslaughter were initiated against the supervisor. The victim’s next of kin also became civil parties to the criminal proceedings.  The administrative court hearing the dispute concluded that the present case did not involve an ‘accident at work’. It annulled the administrative penalties imposed on the employer. According to national legislation, as interpreted by the Romanian Constitutional Court, that administrative decision prevents the criminal court from reconsidering whether the
Read more

Ethics committee opinions on commissioners’ intended new jobs should be made public, says Ombudsman

Image
The European Ombudsman has suggested the European Commission make public all future opinions adopted by the independent ethics committee concerning former commissioners’ post-mandate jobs. Former commissioners are required to give the Commission two months’ notice when they intend to pursue a professional activity during the two years following their departure. The Commission then examines whether the intended activity is compatible with the commissioner’s post service obligations. If the activity is related to the former commissioner’s portfolio, the Commission consults with the Independent Ethical Committee before taking a decision. Under the Commission’s current practices, if a commissioner withdraws an approval request following a negative opinion from the ethics committee, the Commission does not publish the committee’s opinion. The Ombudsman noted that publishing these opinions would improve transparency and public scrutiny around the Commission’s ability to ensure former c
Read more