Do you want to stay informed about this journal? Click the buttons to subscribe to our alerts.
A Family Resemblance? The Regulation of Marriage Migration in Europe
In: European Journal of Migration and LawAbstract
This article analyses key aspects of the regulation of entry and stay of spousal migrants in eea member states. It shows that there are differences of regulation, particularly between states in Eastern and Southern Europe and states in Northern and Western Europe but, in most cases, the amount of divergence is limited. The article connects this ‘family resemblance’ to a broad concept of Europeanisation. Even where there is no binding legal obligation, European legal norms and the practice in other European states largely circumscribe what is possible.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
1
European Commission (2011) Green Paper on the right to family reunification of third country nationals living in the European Union (Directive 2003/86/EC) COM (2011) 735 final p. 1.
-
4
Koopmans et al., note 2 above, pp. 1204–1207.
-
5
S. Sassen (1996), Losing control: Sovereignty in an age of globalization, New York, NY: Columbia University Press; Y. Soysal (1994), Limits of Citizenship: Migrants and Postnational Membership in Europe, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press; for a critique of these perspectives see M. Schain, ‘The state strikes back: Immigration policy in the European Union’, 20 European Journal of International Law(2009) 93–109, at 98–100.
-
7
Koopmans et al., note 2 above, p. 1224.
-
8
Ibid., pp. 1234–1238.
-
11
K. Featherstone (2003), ‘Introduction: In the Name of Europe’, in: K. Featherstone and C. Radaelli (eds), The Politics of Europeanization, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 3–26, at 3–8; S. Blavoukos and G. Oikonomou (2012), Is ‘Europeanization’ Still in Academic Fashion? Empirical Trends in the period 2002–2011, Paper prepared for the Conference ‘Comparing and contrasting “Europeanization”: Concepts and Experiences’, Institute of International Economic Relations, Athens, 14–16 May 2012, pp. 2–4.
-
12
C. Radaelli (2003), ‘The Europeanization of Public Policy’, in: K. Featherstone and C. Radaelli (eds), The Politics of Europeanization, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 27–56, at 40–44.
-
14
Radaelli, note 12 above, pp. 40–44.
-
17
M. Vink and P. Graziano (2007), ‘Challenges of a New Research Agenda’, in: P. Graziano and M. Vink (eds), Europeanization: New Research Agendas, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 3–20, at 3–7; see also G. Menz, ‘Stopping, Shaping and Moulding Europe: Two-Level Games, Non-state Actors and the Europeanization of Migration Policies’, 49 Journal of Common Market Studies(2011) 437–462.
-
18
Menz, ibid., p. 441.
-
23
G. Ruffer (2011), ‘Pushed Beyond Recognition: The Liberality of Family Reunification Policies in the EU’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies37(6), pp. 935–951, p. 944; C. Groenendijk, R. Fernhout, D. van Dam, R. van Oers and M. Strik (2007), The Family Reunification Directive in EU Member States. The first year of implementation, Nijmegen Migration Law Working Papers Series (2007/01), Nijmegen: Radboud University Nijmegen, pp. 2–3.
-
24
Ibid., p. 9.
-
25
Commission of the European Communities (2008), Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the Application of Directive 2003/86 on the Right to Family Reunification, COM (2008) 610 final p. 3.
-
36
Groenendijk et al., note 23 above, p. 20.
-
37
Ibid., p. 9.
-
38
Ibid., p. 4.
-
40
Ibid., p. 218; Bonjour and Block, note 13 above, p. 15; Menz, note 17 above, pp. 443–448.
-
41
Groenendijk et al., note 23 above, p. 71.
-
42
Ibid., p. 69.
-
43
Ibid., pp. 9–11.
-
44
Menz, note 17 above, pp. 443–449; Block and Bonjour, note 13 above.
-
45
Ibid., pp. 69–70.
-
52
Block and Bonjour, note 13 above, p. 26.
-
53
Ibid., p. 27.
-
56
A. Walter (2008), Reverse Discrimination and Family Reunification, Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers.
-
67
T. Strik, B. de Hart and E. Nissen (2013), Family Reunification: A Barrier or Facilitator of Integration; Comparative Study, ICMPD, available online at http://www.inis.gov.ie/en/INIS/Pages/WP07000024, accessed prior to 20 May 2013 (The Netherlands and Ireland); Y. Pascouau and H. Labayle (2011), Conditions for family reunification under strain. A comparative study in nine EU member states. Brussels: King Baudouin Foundation, European Policy Centre and Odysseus Network, p. 67, available online at http://www. epc.eu/documents/uploads/pub_1369_conditionsforfamily.pdf (Slovenia).
-
70
Pascouau and Labayle, note 67 above, p. 69 (Germany).
-
84
See Wray, note 46 above, p. 145.
-
91
Pascouau and Labayle, note 67 above, p. 77.
-
97
Wray (2013), p. 141.
-
101
Pascouau and Labayle, note 67 above, p. 81 (Slovenia).
-
120
Law on Foreigners 1998, as amended, Article 2(2), Add. Provisions (1) (Bulgaria), Aliens and Immigration Law, as amended by Law 8(I)/2007, Articles 18L(1)(a), (5)(Cyprus), Aliens Act 1993, as amended 2006, s121 (Estonia), CESEDA, as amended, Article L411-1–L411-3 (France), Family Reunification in Greece, European Migration Network and Centre of Planning and Economic Research, 2007, Consolidated Act on Immigration (286/1998), as amended by Decree 5/2007, Article 29, Supreme Court Judgment 6441/2009, First Civil Division (Italy), Civil Law PArticle I, http://www.likumi.lv/doc.php?id=90223 (Latvia), Law on the Legal Status of Aliens (Official Gazette, No 73-2539, 2004) (Lithuania), Marriage Act 1975 (Cap. 255); Civil Code (Cap 16, Article 293) (Malta), Act on Foreigners 2003, Article 53(2) (Poland), http://ori.mai.gov.ro/detalii/pagina/en/Family-reunion/75 (Romania), Residence of Aliens Act 404/2011, Article 27(1)(a) (Slovakia), Organic Law 4/2000 Article 17 (Spain), Settlement and Residence Act 2005, Article 47 (Austria), Aliens Act No. 326/1999 Coll., as amended, Article 15a (Czech Republic), http://www.migri.fi/services/customer_bulletins/bulletins_family/1/0/when_applying_for_a_residence_permit_the_partner_in_a_personal_relationship_must_have_a_secure_income (Finland), Residence Act 2005, Sections 27–31 (Germany), Admission and Right of Residence of Third-Country Nationals Act II 2007, Article 2(d), Admission and Residence of Persons with the Right of Free Movement and Residence Act I 2007, Article 2(b), Act XXIX of 2009, Article 3(1) (Hungary), Act on Foreigners No. 96/2002, Article 13, http://www.utl.is/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=71&Itemid=73&lang=en (Iceland), http://www.inis.gov.ie/en/INIS/Pages/WP07000024, http://www.inis.gov.ie/en/INIS/Pages/Civil%20Partnership (Ireland), Aliens Decree 2000, s3(14) (The Netherlands), http://www.bfm.admin.ch/content/bfm/en/home/themen/einreise/faq.0055.html#a_0055(Switzerland), Royal Decree May 2007, Aliens Law, as amended by Law 2011, Article 10(1er) (Belgium), http://www.nyidanmark.dk/en-us/coming_to_dk/familyreunification/spouses/spouses.htm (Denmark), Law of 9 July 2004, as amended by Law of 12 Aug 2010, Article 2, 4(1), Article 144 Civil Code (Luxembourg), Immigration Act Sections 41, 110(3), 114, Immigration Regulations Section 19(6), UDI’s Circular 2010/025 (Norway), Law 23/2007, Articles 98–100, Act 7/2001, Article 1(1) (Portugal), Aliens Act 2011, Article 47(3), http://www.infotujci.si/v/11/Immediate-family-members (Slovenia), Aliens Act 2005:716, Ch 5 s3 (Sweden), Civil Partnership Act 2004, Immigration Rules Part 8, 227–289, 295A (UK).
-
129
Court of Reggio Emilia, 13 February 2012, 1401/2011, Legislative Decree 30/2007 Article 2(b)(1).
-
139
CIMADE (2008), Peu de Meilleur et Trop de Pire: Soupçonnés, Humiliés, Réprimés – Des Couples Mixtes Témoignent, pp. 19–21.
-
153
Act 23/2007 of 4 July 2007, Article 107.4; Act 37/2006 of 9 August 2006, Article 8.1.
-
158
Act 1 of 2007, Articles 10–11; Act 2 of 2007, Articles 19(7), 37(1)(b).
-
160
Act on Aliens of 13 June 2003, Article 53.1.(10)–(11); Act of 14 July 2006 on the entry into, residence in and exit from the Republic of Poland of nationals of the European Union Member States and their family members, Article 19.
-
161
CIMADE (2008a), Peu de meilleur et trop de pire: Soupçonnés, humiliés, réprimés – des couples mixtes témoignent (April 2008); CIMADE (2008b), Devant la loi: Enquête sur les conditions d’accueil des étrangers dans les préfectures, l’information du public et l’instruction des dossiers (May 2008); CIMADE (2010), Visa Refusé: Enquête sur les pratiques des consulats de France en matière de délivrance des visas (July 2010).
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 757 | 121 | 17 |
| Full Text Views | 359 | 18 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 215 | 39 | 3 |
A Family Resemblance? The Regulation of Marriage Migration in Europe
In: European Journal of Migration and LawAbstract
This article analyses key aspects of the regulation of entry and stay of spousal migrants in eea member states. It shows that there are differences of regulation, particularly between states in Eastern and Southern Europe and states in Northern and Western Europe but, in most cases, the amount of divergence is limited. The article connects this ‘family resemblance’ to a broad concept of Europeanisation. Even where there is no binding legal obligation, European legal norms and the practice in other European states largely circumscribe what is possible.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 757 | 121 | 17 |
| Full Text Views | 359 | 18 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 215 | 39 | 3 |