Is the principle of full effectiveness of the rules of European Law and the protection of those rules, as defined in the Francovich and Brasserie du pêcheur judgments, in conjunction with Directive 2004/38/EC, to be interpreted as imposing an obligation on a Member State, in circumstances where the right of residence of a foreign national has been withdrawn without prior consideration of proportionality, as a result of an error in transposition into domestic law, to cover, within the framework of its welfare system, the basic needs of the applicant other than medical needs, until the applicant’s position as regards the right of residence has been determined in conformity with EU law?
DOI: 10.5553/EELC/187791072019004003026
European Employment Law Cases |
|
| Pending Cases | Case C-394/19, Free movementPN, QO, RP, SQ, TR – v – Centre public d’action sociale d’Anderlecht (CPAS), reference lodged by the Tribunal du travail francophone de Bruxelles (Belgium) on 21 May 2019 |
| Keywords | Free movement |
| DOI | 10.5553/EELC/187791072019004003026 |
|
Show PDF Show fullscreen Abstract Statistics Citation |
| This article has been viewed times. |
| This article been downloaded 0 times. |
Suggested citation
, "Case C-394/19, Free movement", European Employment Law Cases, 3, (2019):222-223
, "Case C-394/19, Free movement", European Employment Law Cases, 3, (2019):222-223
|
|