To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This chapter examines the evolution of Association Agreements after the Single European Act and before the failed Constitutional Treaty. It begins by analysing the case-law on Association Agreements and it shows how the Court shaped an extensive system of rights for migrants in light of the role they played in the EU project of growth. This approach of the Court was not well received. Rather, Member States tried to restrict rights of migrant workers in Association Agreements concluded during this period precisely with the purpose of avoiding the transposition of the relevant case-law. The chapter also examines the clauses in enlargement and association with European developed countries, where the extension of rights to migrants was easily accepted.
This chapter addresses the special arrangements made to regulate migration from specific third countries in the period before the Single European Act. First, it will be shown how social and economic objectives, paired with favourable economic circumstances, laid the foundation for the extensive protection of Turkish workers under the EEC–Turkey Association Agreement. Following this, the analysis shows how economic cooperation with specific countries that were crucial for supplying migrant labour led to the attribution of rights to third-country nationals despite their exclusion from primary and secondary law. Finally, the chapter discusses enlargement processes and investigates how accession treaties concluded during this period were framed in light of ensuring the promotion of economic objectives, while limiting migration rights for nationals of acceding states. The analysis reveals the constant attempts by EU institutions to ensure that migration policy is aligned with the objectives of growth and progress, and thereby with the economic and social pillars of sustainability.
The point of departure of this chapter is the EU’s close cooperation with third countries, especially in the neighbourhood, which has erased a number of perceived boundaries between the EU and non-member states. Whereas within the EU, family members are largely considered to be the natural beneficiaries of the free movement of persons with ensuing residence and social rights, it is less clear whether the same undisputed status of a family also applies beyond the EU’s borders. The EU has concluded a number of association agreements with countries in its neighbourhood which comprise, to varying degrees, access to the EU’s internal market including the free movement of workers. The Polydor-doctrine of the Court of Justice of the EU has, however, established that similarly worded provisions in the EU Treaties and cooperation agreements concluded with third countries do not guarantee identical interpretation. With a focus on Turkey, the European Economic Area and the United Kingdom, the chapter analyses the conception of family and related rights in the EU’s cooperation instruments, with an aim to establish the extent to which non-EU families can be considered ‘EU families’.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.