AbstractIn the Gouvernement de la Communauté française and Gouvernement wallon case, the Court of Justice was mainly faced with the question of the applicability of the Community law provisions governing free movement of persons in "internal situations" i.e., situations in which EU citizens who are nationals of the host Member States, may not invoke the protection of Community law due to the lack of a cross-border element. The Court resists the call of its AG, but its reply does not give a definitive answer to the situation of those nationals who have exercised, to some extent, their right to free movement. In the Eind case, the Court was confronted with the question whether the third country family member of a national of the host Member State, who has no right of residence in that State, nevertheless enjoys a right of family reunification there upon the return of that national from another Member State where he exercised his right to free movement. The Court answers that question positively, but its legal reasoning is questionable.
The Court of Justice, the National Courts, and the Controversy over the ‘Ultimate Arbiter’ of the Constitutionality of Law in the European Union