Suchergebnisse

Intro -- Acknowledgements -- Table of Contents -- Table of Cases -- Table of Legislation -- 1. Introduction -- I. The Shifting Landscape of EU Citizenship Jurisprudence -- II. Contributions, Aims and Scope of this Book -- III. Outline of Chapters -- 2. Free Movement, Redistributive Tension and the Role of EU Law -- I. A Quasi-Federal Problem: The Inherent Tension between EU Free Movement Law, Citizenship and the Welfare State -- II. EU Law as a Tool for Balancing Competing Interests -- III. The Role of the CJEU in Citizenship Jurisprudence on Welfare Access -- IV. Chapter Conclusions -- 3. Residence and Welfare Access for Intra-EU Jobseekers -- I. Introduction -- II. EU Objectives Underpinning Jobseeker Mobility in the Union -- III. Residence and Access to Social Benefits for Jobseekers -- IV. Limits on the Rights of Jobseekers to Social Benefits -- V. Chapter Conclusions -- 4. Residence and Welfare Access for Mobile EU Students -- I. Introduction -- II. Education and Student Mobility as an EU Objective -- III. The Right to Move and Reside for the Purposes of Study -- IV. Equal Treatment for Access to Student Maintenance Benefits -- V. Claims for Social Benefits from the Home Member State: The Exportability of Student Benefits -- VI. Chapter Conclusions -- 5. Residence and Welfare Access for Mobile Economically Inactive Citizens -- I. Introduction -- II. Free Movement of Union Citizens: Residence, Equal Treatment and the 'Benefit Tourism' Debate -- III. Restrictions on Access to Welfare for Economically Inactive EU Citizens -- IV. Assessing the Overall Balance of Interests after Dano and Commission v UK -- V. Chapter Conclusions -- 6. Intra-Union Mobility and the Justifiability of Imbalances between Conflicting Interests -- I. Introduction -- II. Harmonisation of Restrictions on Free Movement: The Impact of Recent Citizenship Jurisprudence.

The role of proportionality and individual assessments in EU residency and welfare access cases has changed significantly over the course of the last decade. This article demonstrates how a search for certainty and efficiency in this area of EU law has created greater uncertainty, more legal hurdles for citizens, and less consistency in decision-making at the national level. UK case law illustrates the difficulty faced by national authorities when interpreting and applying the rules relating to welfare access and proportionality. Ultimately, the law lacks the consistency and transparency that recent CJEU case law seeks to obtain, raising the question of whether the shift from the Court's previous, more flexible, case-by-case approach was desirable after all.