Diccionario panhispánico del español jurídico

1 de 1 copias disponibles

CJEU - Judgment of 23.9.2013 (Grand Chamber) - Case C-221/11 Leyla Demirkan v Bundesrepublik Deutschland - "Association Agreement with Turkey - Article 41 of the Additional Protocol - Freedom to provide services - Visa requirement". Turkey Association Agreement does not cover passive recipients of services and Turkish nationals wishing to entry in the Schengen area cannot benefit from this freedom

por Matera, Claudio

Artículo
ISSN: 1138-4026
Ver otros artículos del mismo número: 47

ith the Demirkan case the CJEU was called upon to clarify the scope of Article 41(1) of the Additional protocol to the EU - Turkey Association Agreement and affirm whether the Soysal and Savatli ruling was also applicable to the passive reception of services and, more specifically, to tourists. The CJEU answered negatively and adopted a strict literal interpretation of Article 41(1). With this decision the CJEU affirmed that article 41(1) of the Additional protocol does not apply to services recipients and to reach this conclusion the CJEU emphasised that the EU -Turkey Association Agreement and protocol should be interpreted in the light of the context and objectives enshrined at the time of their conclusion. By doing so the CJEU adopted a formal method of interpretation that does not seem to take into consideration the status of candidate country of Turkey and that appears stricter than the techniques used by the CJEU in other cases. As a result of this tourists and other recipient of services from Turkey will have to keep on applying for a visa to enter the Schengen area until the visa liberalisation agreement enters in to force.

Tabla de Contenidos

I. INTRODUCTION
II. THE LEYLA DEMIRKAN CASE: FACTUAL BACKGROUND
III. OPINION OF THE ADVOCATE GENERAL AND DECISION BY THE COURT OF JUSTICE
IV. ANALYSIS
V. CONCLUSIONS


  • Formato: PDF
  • Número de páginas: 20

Agregar valoración

Para este apartado es necesario identificarse mediante la opción "Acceso" en el menú superior

ith the Demirkan case the CJEU was called upon to clarify the scope of Article 41(1) of the Additional protocol to the EU - Turkey Association Agreement and affirm whether the Soysal and Savatli ruling was also applicable to the passive reception of services and, more specifically, to tourists. The CJEU answered negatively and adopted a strict literal interpretation of Article 41(1). With this decision the CJEU affirmed that article 41(1) of the Additional protocol does not apply to services recipients and to reach this conclusion the CJEU emphasised that the EU -Turkey Association Agreement and protocol should be interpreted in the light of the context and objectives enshrined at the time of their conclusion. By doing so the CJEU adopted a formal method of interpretation that does not seem to take into consideration the status of candidate country of Turkey and that appears stricter than the techniques used by the CJEU in other cases. As a result of this tourists and other recipient of services from Turkey will have to keep on applying for a visa to enter the Schengen area until the visa liberalisation agreement enters in to force.

Tabla de Contenidos

I. INTRODUCTION
II. THE LEYLA DEMIRKAN CASE: FACTUAL BACKGROUND
III. OPINION OF THE ADVOCATE GENERAL AND DECISION BY THE COURT OF JUSTICE
IV. ANALYSIS
V. CONCLUSIONS


  • Formato: PDF
  • Número de páginas: 20
  • Lectura offline protegida
  • Lectura online

Agregar valoración

Para este apartado es necesario identificarse mediante la opción "Acceso" en el menú superior
  • Español
  • Inglés