CJEU - Judgment of 23.9.2013 (Grand Chamber) – Case C-221/11 Leyla Demirkan v Bundesrepublik Deutschland – «Association Agreement with Turkey – Article 41 of the Additional Protocol - Freedom to provide services – Visa requirement». Turkey Association Agr
Keywords:
Turkey association agreement, additional protocol, article 41(1), ‘standstill’ clause, visa requirement for admission to the territory of a Member State, freedom to provide services, the right of a Turkish national to enter a Member State in order to visiAbstract
With the Demirkan case the CJEU was called upon to clarify the scope of Article 41(1) of the Additional protocol to the EU - Turkey Association Agreement and affirm whether the Soysal and Savatli ruling was also applicable to the passive reception of services and, more specifically, to tourists. The CJEU answered negatively and adopted a strict literal interpretation of Article 41(1). With this decision the CJEU affirmed that article 41(1) of the Additional protocol does not apply to services recipients and to reach this conclusion the CJEU emphasised that the EU -Turkey Association Agreement and protocol should be interpreted in the light of the context and objectives enshrined at the time of their conclusion. By doing so the CJEU adopted a formal method of interpretation that does not seem to take into consideration the status of candidate country of Turkey and that appears stricter than the techniques used by the CJEU in other cases. As a result of this tourists and other recipient of services from Turkey will have to keep on applying for a visa to enter the Schengen area until the visa liberalisation agreement enters in to force.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Downloads
How to Cite
Matera, C. (2015). CJEU - Judgment of 23.9.2013 (Grand Chamber) – Case C-221/11 Leyla Demirkan v Bundesrepublik Deutschland – «Association Agreement with Turkey – Article 41 of the Additional Protocol - Freedom to provide services – Visa requirement». Turkey Association Agr. Revista De Derecho Comunitario Europeo, (47), 285–299. Retrieved from https://recyt.fecyt.es/index.php/RDCE/article/view/39304
Issue
Section
CASE LAW COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EU
License
Copyright
Submission of a manuscript to the RDCE implies having read and accepted the journal's editorial guidelines and instructions for authors. When a work is accepted for publication, it is understood that the author grants the RDCE exclusive rights of reproduction, distribution and, where appropriate, sale of his manuscript for exploitation in all countries of the world in printed version, as well as any other magnetic, optical and digital media.
Authors shall transfer the publishing rights of their manuscript to RDCE so that it may be disseminated and capitalised on Intranets, the Internet and any web portals and wireless devices that the publisher may decide, by placing it at the disposal of users so that the latter may consult it online and extract content from it, print it and/or download and save it. These activities must comply with the terms and conditions outlined on the website hosting the work. However, the RDCE authorises authors of papers published in the journal to include a copy of these papers, once published, on their personal websites and/or other open access digital repositories. Copies must include a specific mention of RDCE, citing the year and issue of the journal in which the article was published, and adding a link to the RDCE website(s).
A year after its publication, the works of the RDCE will be under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivative 4.0 International license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which allows third parties to share the work as long as its author and its first publication is indicated, without the right to commercial exploitation and the elaboration of derivative works.
Plagiarism and scientific fraud
The publication of work that infringes on intellectual property rights is the sole responsibility of the authors, including any conflicts that may occur regarding infringement of copyright. This includes, most importantly, conflicts related to the commission of plagiarism and/or scientific fraud.
Practices constituting scientific plagiarism are as follows:
1. Presenting the work of others as your own.
2. Adopting words or ideas from other authors without due recognition.
3. Not using quotation marks or another distinctive format to distinguish literal quotations.
4. Giving incorrect information about the true source of a citation.
5. The paraphrasing of a source without mentioning the source.
6. Excessive paraphrasing, even if the source is mentioned.
Practices constituting scientific fraud are as follows:
1. Fabrication, falsification or omission of data and plagiarism.
2. Duplicate publication.
3. Conflicts of authorship.
Warning
Any breach of these Rules shall constitute a ground for rejection of the manuscript submitted.
