{"attribution":{"source":"legal.exploreworldai.com","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu:c-560-24","cite_as":"NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu:c-560-24)","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision","version":"legal-2026-10-24","fingerprint":"ewai:eu:210f09","proof":"sha256:a7488567164e03738091ecfda00d181a340646c8ef375e986ba52cd1f561425a","jurisdiction":"eu","lang":"en","publisher":"NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal","terms":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om"},"brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","item":{"schema_version":"1.0.0","id":"eu:c-560-24","jurisdiction":"eu","lang":"en","brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","brand":{"product":"NovaCopilot","platform":"ExploreWorldAI","infrastructure":"ExploreWorld Legal","infrastructure_url":"legal.exploreworldai.com","legal_entity":"Valkiv Ventures AB","permanent_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot","source":"Source: NovaCopilot","powered_by":"Powered by NovaCopilot","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor"},"sections":[{"title":"Front matter","paragraphs":["para_1","para_2","para_3","para_4","para_5","para_6","para_7","para_8","para_9","para_10","para_11","para_12","para_13","para_14","para_15","para_16","para_17","para_18","para_19","para_20","para_21","para_22","para_23","para_24","para_25"],"kind":"front_matter"},{"title":"Judgment","paragraphs":["para_26","para_27","para_28","para_29","para_30"],"kind":"assessment"},{"title":"Legal framework","paragraphs":["para_31"],"kind":"legal_framework"},{"title":"European Union law","paragraphs":["para_32","para_33","para_34","para_35","para_36","para_37","para_38","para_39","para_40","para_41","para_42","para_43","para_44","para_45","para_46","para_47","para_48","para_49","para_50","para_51","para_52","para_53","para_54","para_55","para_56","para_57","para_58","para_59","para_60","para_61","para_62","para_63","para_64","para_65"],"kind":"legal_framework"},{"title":"Irish law","paragraphs":["para_66","para_67","para_68","para_69","para_70","para_71","para_72","para_73","para_74","para_75","para_76","para_77","para_78","para_79"],"kind":"legal_framework"},{"title":"The dispute in the main proceedings and the question referred for a preliminary ruling","paragraphs":["para_80","para_81","para_82","para_83","para_84","para_85","para_86","para_87","para_88","para_89","para_90","para_91","para_92","para_93","para_94","para_95","para_96","para_97","para_98","para_99","para_100","para_101","para_102","para_103","para_104","para_105","para_106","para_107","para_108","para_109","para_110","para_111","para_112","para_113"],"kind":"facts"},{"title":"The question referred for a preliminary ruling","paragraphs":["para_114","para_115","para_116"],"kind":"questions"},{"title":"Preliminary observations","paragraphs":["para_117","para_118","para_119","para_120","para_121","para_122","para_123","para_124","para_125","para_126","para_127","para_128","para_129"],"kind":"questions"},{"title":"Interpretation of Article 35 of Directive 2004/38","paragraphs":["para_130","para_131","para_132","para_133","para_134","para_135","para_136","para_137","para_138","para_139","para_140","para_141","para_142","para_143","para_144","para_145","para_146","para_147","para_148","para_149","para_150","para_151","para_152","para_153","para_154","para_155","para_156","para_157","para_158","para_159","para_160","para_161","para_162","para_163","para_164","para_165","para_166","para_167","para_168","para_169","para_170","para_171","para_172","para_173","para_174","para_175","para_176","para_177","para_178","para_179","para_180","para_181","para_182","para_183","para_184","para_185","para_186","para_187","para_188"],"kind":"questions"},{"title":"Costs","paragraphs":["para_189","para_190","para_191"],"kind":"costs"},{"title":"On those grounds, the Court (Second Chamber) hereby rules:","paragraphs":["para_192","para_193","para_194","para_195","para_196","para_197","para_198","para_199","para_200","para_201","para_202","para_203","para_204","para_205","para_206"],"kind":"operative"}],"paragraphs":[{"text":"62024CJ0560","paragraph_id":"para_1"},{"text":"JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Second Chamber)","paragraph_id":"para_2"},{"text":"4 June 2026 (\n *1\n )","paragraph_id":"para_3"},{"text":"(Reference for a preliminary ruling – Citizenship of the Union – Right to move and reside freely in the territory of the Member States – Directive 2004/38/EC – Article 3(1) – Beneficiaries – Family members of a Union citizen – Derived right of residence of a third-country national – Subsequent natur …","paragraph_id":"para_4"},{"text":"In Case C‑560/24 [Besthame], (\n i\n )","paragraph_id":"para_5"},{"text":"REQUEST for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the Court of Appeal (Ireland), made by decision of 2 July 2024, received at the Court on 19 August 2024, in the proceedings","paragraph_id":"para_6"},{"text":"R.S.","paragraph_id":"para_7"},{"text":"v","paragraph_id":"para_8"},{"text":"Minister for Justice,","paragraph_id":"para_9"},{"text":"THE COURT (Second Chamber),","paragraph_id":"para_10"},{"text":"composed of K. Jürimäe (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, K. Lenaerts, President of the Court, acting as Judge of the Second Chamber, F. Schalin, M. Gavalec and Z. Csehi, Judges,","paragraph_id":"para_11"},{"text":"Advocate General: R. Norkus,","paragraph_id":"para_12"},{"text":"Registrar: C. Strömholm, Administrator,","paragraph_id":"para_13"},{"text":"having regard to the written procedure and further to the hearing on 15 October 2025,","paragraph_id":"para_14"},{"text":"after considering the observations submitted on behalf of:","paragraph_id":"para_15"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_16"},{"text":"R.S., by C. Power, Senior Counsel, D. Leonard, Barrister-at-Law, and J. Watters, Solicitor,","paragraph_id":"para_17"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_18"},{"text":"the Minister for Justice and Ireland, by M. Browne, Chief State Solicitor, S. Finnegan, A. Joyce and G. Wells, acting as Agents, and by D. Conlan Smyth, Senior Counsel, and S. Cooney, Barrister-at-Law,","paragraph_id":"para_19"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_20"},{"text":"the German Government, by J. Möller, R. Kanitz and N. Scheffel, acting as Agents,","paragraph_id":"para_21"},{"text":"–","paragraph_id":"para_22"},{"text":"the European Commission, by E. Montaguti and J. Tomkin, acting as Agents,","paragraph_id":"para_23"},{"text":"after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 15 January 2026,","paragraph_id":"para_24"},{"text":"makes the following","paragraph_id":"para_25"},{"text":"Judgment","paragraph_id":"para_26"},{"text":"1","paragraph_id":"para_27"},{"text":"This request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Article 35 of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States am …","paragraph_id":"para_28","court_paragraph":1},{"text":"2","paragraph_id":"para_29"},{"text":"The request has been made in proceedings between R.S., a third-country national, who has been naturalised as an Irish citizen, and the Minister for Justice (Ireland), concerning the finding by the Minister for Justice that, before acquiring Irish nationality, R.S. had entered into a marriage of convenience with a Union citizen for the purposes of obtaining a residence card of a family member of a Union citizen.","paragraph_id":"para_30","court_paragraph":2},{"text":"Legal framework","paragraph_id":"para_31"},{"text":"European Union law","paragraph_id":"para_32"},{"text":"3","paragraph_id":"para_33"},{"text":"Recital 28 of Directive 2004/38 states:","paragraph_id":"para_34","court_paragraph":3},{"text":"‘To guard against abuse of rights or fraud, notably marriages of convenience or any other form of relationships contracted for the sole purpose of enjoying the right of free movement and residence, Member States should have the possibility to adopt the necessary measures.’","paragraph_id":"para_35"},{"text":"4","paragraph_id":"para_36"},{"text":"Article 2 of that directive, entitled ‘Definitions’, provides:","paragraph_id":"para_37","court_paragraph":4},{"text":"‘For the purposes of this Directive:","paragraph_id":"para_38"},{"text":"1.","paragraph_id":"para_39"},{"text":"“Union citizen” means any person having the nationality of a Member State;","paragraph_id":"para_40"},{"text":"2.","paragraph_id":"para_41"},{"text":"“family member” means:","paragraph_id":"para_42"},{"text":"(a)","paragraph_id":"para_43"},{"text":"the spouse …’","paragraph_id":"para_44"},{"text":"5","paragraph_id":"para_45"},{"text":"Article 3 of that directive, entitled ‘Beneficiaries’, provides in paragraph 1:","paragraph_id":"para_46","court_paragraph":5},{"text":"‘This Directive shall apply to all Union citizens who move to or reside in a Member State other than that of which they are a national, and to their family members as defined in point 2 of Article 2 who accompany or join them.’","paragraph_id":"para_47"},{"text":"6","paragraph_id":"para_48"},{"text":"Article 15 of that directive determines the procedural safeguards applicable where decisions are adopted restricting free movement of Union citizens and their family members on grounds other than public policy, public security or public health.","paragraph_id":"para_49","court_paragraph":6},{"text":"7","paragraph_id":"para_50"},{"text":"Article 27 of Directive 2004/38 lays down the general principles applicable where the right of entry and the right of residence of Union citizens and their family members are restricted on grounds of public policy, public security or public health.","paragraph_id":"para_51","court_paragraph":7},{"text":"8","paragraph_id":"para_52"},{"text":"Article 30 of that directive, entitled ‘Notification of decisions’, provides:","paragraph_id":"para_53","court_paragraph":8},{"text":"‘1.   The persons concerned shall be notified in writing of any decision taken under Article 27(1), in such a way that they are able to comprehend its content and the implications for them.","paragraph_id":"para_54"},{"text":"…","paragraph_id":"para_55"},{"text":"3.   The notification shall specify the court or administrative authority with which the person concerned may lodge an appeal, the time limit for the appeal and, where applicable, the time allowed for the person to leave the territory of the Member State. Save in duly substantiated cases of urgency, the time allowed to leave the territory shall be not less than one month from the date of notification.’","paragraph_id":"para_56"},{"text":"9","paragraph_id":"para_57"},{"text":"Article 31 of that directive, entitled ‘Procedural safeguards’, provides:","paragraph_id":"para_58","court_paragraph":9},{"text":"‘1.   The persons concerned shall have access to judicial and, where appropriate, administrative redress procedures in the host Member State to appeal against or seek review of any decision taken against them on the grounds of public policy, public security or public health.","paragraph_id":"para_59"},{"text":"…","paragraph_id":"para_60"},{"text":"3.   The redress procedures shall allow for an examination of the legality of the decision, as well as of the facts and circumstances on which the proposed measure is based. They shall ensure that the decision is not disproportionate, particularly in view of the requirements laid down in Article 28.","paragraph_id":"para_61"},{"text":"…’","paragraph_id":"para_62"},{"text":"10","paragraph_id":"para_63"},{"text":"Article 35 of that directive, entitled ‘Abuse of rights’, states:","paragraph_id":"para_64","court_paragraph":10},{"text":"‘Member States may adopt the necessary measures to refuse, terminate or withdraw any right conferred by the Directive in the case of abuse of rights or fraud, such as marriages of convenience. Any such measure shall be proportionate and subject to the procedural safeguards provided for in Articles 30 and 31.’","paragraph_id":"para_65"},{"text":"Irish law","paragraph_id":"para_66"},{"text":"11","paragraph_id":"para_67"},{"text":"Directive 2004/38 was transposed into Irish law by the European Communities (Free Movement of Persons) Regulations 2015 (S.I. No 548 of 2015), in the version applicable to the dispute in the main proceedings (‘the 2015 Regulations’).","paragraph_id":"para_68","court_paragraph":11},{"text":"12","paragraph_id":"para_69"},{"text":"Regulation 27 of the 2015 Regulations, entitled ‘Cessation of entitlements’, provides:","paragraph_id":"para_70","court_paragraph":12},{"text":"‘(1)   The Minister may revoke, refuse to make or refuse to grant, as the case may be, any of the following where he or she decides, in accordance with this Regulation, that the right, entitlement or status, as the case may be, concerned is being claimed on the basis of fraud or abuse of rights: …","paragraph_id":"para_71"},{"text":"( b ) a residence card …","paragraph_id":"para_72"},{"text":"(2)   Where the Minister suspects, on reasonable grounds, that any right, entitlement or status conferred by these Regulations is being claimed, or has been obtained, on the basis of fraud or abuse of rights, he or she shall be entitled to make such enquiries and to obtain such information as is reasonably necessary to investigate the matter.","paragraph_id":"para_73"},{"text":"…","paragraph_id":"para_74"},{"text":"(4)   In this Regulation, “abuse of rights” shall include a marriage of convenience …’","paragraph_id":"para_75"},{"text":"13","paragraph_id":"para_76"},{"text":"Regulation 28 of those Regulations, entitled ‘Marriages of convenience’, provides:","paragraph_id":"para_77","court_paragraph":13},{"text":"‘(1)   The Minister, in making his or her determination of any matter relevant to these Regulations, may disregard a particular marriage as a factor bearing on that determination where the Minister deems or determines that marriage to be a marriage of convenience.","paragraph_id":"para_78"},{"text":"(2)   Where the Minister, in taking into account a marriage for the purpose of making a determination of any matter relevant to these Regulations, has reasonable grounds for considering that the marriage is a marriage of convenience, he or she may send a notice to the parties to the marriage requiri …","paragraph_id":"para_79"},{"text":"The dispute in the main proceedings and the question referred for a preliminary ruling","paragraph_id":"para_80"},{"text":"14","paragraph_id":"para_81"},{"text":"R.S., who was born in a third country of which he was a national, entered Ireland as the holder of a student residence permit.","paragraph_id":"para_82","court_paragraph":14},{"text":"15","paragraph_id":"para_83"},{"text":"In 2010, 16 days before the expiry of that permit, R.S. married a Union citizen who had exercised her freedom to move to and reside in Ireland. He was subsequently issued a five-year residence card as a family member of a Union citizen.","paragraph_id":"para_84","court_paragraph":15},{"text":"16","paragraph_id":"para_85"},{"text":"In 2015, R.S. acquired Irish citizenship. Since then, his residence in Ireland has been based on that nationality.","paragraph_id":"para_86","court_paragraph":16},{"text":"17","paragraph_id":"para_87"},{"text":"In 2018, R.S. and his wife divorced.","paragraph_id":"para_88","court_paragraph":17},{"text":"18","paragraph_id":"para_89"},{"text":"In 2019, a third-country national applied for residence in Ireland on the ground that she was the mother of a child, an Irish national, of whom R.S. was the biological father. That application prompted an investigation to determine whether the marriage contracted in 2010 was a marriage of convenience.","paragraph_id":"para_90","court_paragraph":18},{"text":"19","paragraph_id":"para_91"},{"text":"By decision of 13 February 2020, the Minister for Justice ‘revoked’ the residence card issued to R.S. in 2010 on the ground that, in support of his residence card application, R.S. had produced misleading documents and that the marriage contracted in 2010 was a marriage of convenience. Following an application for review submitted by R.S., that decision was upheld by a decision of the Minister for Justice of 8 September 2020.","paragraph_id":"para_92","court_paragraph":19},{"text":"20","paragraph_id":"para_93"},{"text":"On 1 February 2022, the Minister for Justice, however, adopted a new decision further to correspondence with R.S.’s solicitors. By that decision, the Minister rescinded the decision of 8 September 2020, set aside the decision of 13 February 2020 and found that R.S. had produced false or misleading d …","paragraph_id":"para_94","court_paragraph":20},{"text":"21","paragraph_id":"para_95"},{"text":"R.S. brought an application before the High Court (Ireland) for annulment (certiorari) of the decisions of 13 February 2020, 8 September 2020 and 1 February 2022 on the ground that the Minister for Justice had acted ultra vires. Since he became an Irish national, R.S. is no longer covered by any pro …","paragraph_id":"para_96","court_paragraph":21},{"text":"22","paragraph_id":"para_97"},{"text":"R.S. then referred the matter to the Court of Appeal (Ireland), which is the referring court.","paragraph_id":"para_98","court_paragraph":22},{"text":"23","paragraph_id":"para_99"},{"text":"That court states, from the outset, that the decision of 1 February 2022 must be understood as not entailing the revocation or the refusal of a right of residence, but rather as containing a ‘determination’, a ‘finding’ or a ‘conclusion’ as to a past state of affairs or the past conduct of R.S. It a …","paragraph_id":"para_100","court_paragraph":23},{"text":"24","paragraph_id":"para_101"},{"text":"In view of the arguments raised before it, the referring court asks, in the first place, about the scope of Directive 2004/38 and, in particular, of Article 35 thereof.","paragraph_id":"para_102","court_paragraph":24},{"text":"25","paragraph_id":"para_103"},{"text":"In that regard, that court inferred from the judgment of 14 November 2017, Lounes ( C‑165/16 , EU:C:2017:862 ), that Directive 2004/38 ceases to apply to a third-country national who is a family member of a Union citizen once that national acquires the citizenship of the host Member State and, as a …","paragraph_id":"para_104","court_paragraph":25},{"text":"26","paragraph_id":"para_105"},{"text":"In the light of those factors, that court asks whether, by analogy with the solution adopted in the latter judgment, Directive 2004/38 governs a situation in which the competent authority of a Member State seeks to determine whether a person, who has enjoyed a right of residence based on that directive, obtained that right by abuse of rights or by fraud, on a date when that person is no longer a ‘beneficiary’ within the meaning of Article 3(1) of that directive.","paragraph_id":"para_106","court_paragraph":26},{"text":"27","paragraph_id":"para_107"},{"text":"In the second place, the referring court notes that Irish law unequivocally empowers the Minister for Justice to investigate fraud or abuse of rights in order to ‘revoke, refuse to make or refuse to grant … a residence card’, but that revocation or refusal cannot be retroactive. It also states that, …","paragraph_id":"para_108","court_paragraph":27},{"text":"28","paragraph_id":"para_109"},{"text":"For the referring court, such an autonomous power of investigation may be justified in the light of the purpose of the rules on Union citizenship, which require that there be a robust system for the prevention, detection and eradication of fraud and abuse of rights. In order to be able, if appropria …","paragraph_id":"para_110","court_paragraph":28},{"text":"29","paragraph_id":"para_111"},{"text":"In those circumstances, the Court of Appeal decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following question to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling:","paragraph_id":"para_112","court_paragraph":29},{"text":"‘Does Directive [2004/38] apply to a person who previously obtained the benefit of derived residence in a Member State by virtue of being a spouse of an EU national exercising [rights under the FEU Treaty] in the host State but who has more recently become a citizen in the host State and is no longe …","paragraph_id":"para_113"},{"text":"The question referred for a preliminary ruling","paragraph_id":"para_114"},{"text":"30","paragraph_id":"para_115"},{"text":"By its single question, the referring court asks, in essence, whether Article 35 of Directive 2004/38 must be interpreted as allowing the competent authorities of a Member State to investigate and, if appropriate, make a determination or reach a conclusion that a person, who was previously a benefic …","paragraph_id":"para_116","court_paragraph":30},{"text":"Preliminary observations","paragraph_id":"para_117"},{"text":"31","paragraph_id":"para_118"},{"text":"As a preliminary point, it should be recalled that, in accordance with Article 3(1) of Directive 2004/38, Union citizens who move to or reside in a Member State other than the one of which they are a national, and their family members, as defined in Article 2(2) of that directive, who accompany or j …","paragraph_id":"para_119","court_paragraph":31},{"text":"32","paragraph_id":"para_120"},{"text":"On the other hand, since, under a principle of international law, a Member State cannot refuse its own nationals the right to enter its territory and remain there and since those nationals thus enjoy an unconditional right of residence there, Directive 2004/38 is not intended to govern the residence …","paragraph_id":"para_121","court_paragraph":32},{"text":"33","paragraph_id":"para_122"},{"text":"In the present case, it is apparent from the explanations provided by the referring court that, during the period from 2010 to 2015, R.S., then a third-country national, resided in Ireland as the spouse of a Union citizen who had exercised her right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States. During that period, R.S.’s residence in Ireland was therefore based on Directive 2004/38, of which he was a beneficiary.","paragraph_id":"para_123","court_paragraph":33},{"text":"34","paragraph_id":"para_124"},{"text":"However, as the referring court observes, R.S.’s acquisition of Irish nationality in 2015 entailed, for him, a change in the legal arrangements both under national law and under Directive 2004/38. Since that acquisition, R.S. has resided in Ireland on the basis of national law and no longer meets th …","paragraph_id":"para_125","court_paragraph":34},{"text":"35","paragraph_id":"para_126"},{"text":"Thus, on the date on which the investigation into the existence of a marriage of convenience was opened in 2019, R.S. was no longer a ‘beneficiary’ within the meaning of that provision. However, that investigation covered, inter alia, a period in which R.S. had actually been residing in Ireland on t …","paragraph_id":"para_127","court_paragraph":35},{"text":"36","paragraph_id":"para_128"},{"text":"It is in the light of those preliminary observations that Article 35 of Directive 2004/38 should be interpreted in order to determine, first, whether that provision continues to apply in circumstances such as those described in the preceding paragraph and, second, whether it allows the Member States to carry out an investigation with a view to establishing merely the existence of a marriage of convenience.","paragraph_id":"para_129","court_paragraph":36},{"text":"Interpretation of Article 35 of Directive 2004/38","paragraph_id":"para_130"},{"text":"37","paragraph_id":"para_131"},{"text":"In accordance with Article 35 of Directive 2004/38, Member States may adopt the necessary measures to refuse, terminate or withdraw any right conferred by that directive in the case of abuse of rights or fraud, such as marriages of convenience, it being understood that any such measure must be proportionate and subject to the procedural safeguards provided for in the directive.","paragraph_id":"para_132","court_paragraph":37},{"text":"38","paragraph_id":"para_133"},{"text":"In interpreting a provision, it is necessary to consider not only its wording, but also the context in which it occurs and the objectives pursued by the rules of which it is part (see judgments of 17 November 1983, Merck, 292/82 , EU:C:1983:335 , paragraph  12 , and of 1 August 2022, Familienkasse Niedersachsen-Bremen, C‑411/20 , EU:C:2022:602 , paragraph  51 ).","paragraph_id":"para_134","court_paragraph":38},{"text":"39","paragraph_id":"para_135"},{"text":"In the first instance, with regard to the temporal scope of Article 35 of Directive 2004/38, it should be observed, first, that that provision is worded broadly, as is shown by the terms indicating that Member States may adopt the ‘necessary measures’ to ‘refuse, terminate or withdraw’‘any’ right ‘c …","paragraph_id":"para_136","court_paragraph":39},{"text":"40","paragraph_id":"para_137"},{"text":"First of all, by its wording, Article 35 of Directive 2004/38 does not make the adoption by the Member States of the necessary measures to refuse, terminate or withdraw any right conferred by that directive contingent on any express time limit.","paragraph_id":"para_138","court_paragraph":40},{"text":"41","paragraph_id":"para_139"},{"text":"Next, the use of the past participle ‘conferred’ suggests that the EU legislature intended to grant Member States the power to adopt measures in respect of rights of which the person concerned is or was the beneficiary under that directive.","paragraph_id":"para_140","court_paragraph":41},{"text":"42","paragraph_id":"para_141"},{"text":"Finally, as the Advocate General observed in point 42 of his Opinion, the use of separate verbs (‘refuse’, ‘terminate’, ‘withdraw’, in the English-language version; ‘denegar’, ‘extinguir’, ‘retirar’, in the Spanish-language version; ‘verweigern’, ‘aufheben’, ‘widerrufen’, in the German-language vers …","paragraph_id":"para_142","court_paragraph":42},{"text":"43","paragraph_id":"para_143"},{"text":"It follows from those elements of literal interpretation that Article 35 of Directive 2004/38 is intended to apply to measures taken under a right conferred by that directive during a period in the past, even if the person concerned is no longer, at the time those measures were adopted, a ‘beneficiary’ within the meaning of Article 3(1) of that directive.","paragraph_id":"para_144","court_paragraph":43},{"text":"44","paragraph_id":"para_145"},{"text":"Second, that literal interpretation is consistent with the context of Article 35 of Directive 2004/38.","paragraph_id":"para_146","court_paragraph":44},{"text":"45","paragraph_id":"para_147"},{"text":"According to recital 28 of that directive, ‘to guard against abuse of rights or fraud, notably marriages of convenience or any other form of relationships contracted for the sole purpose of enjoying the right of free movement and residence, Member States should have the possibility to adopt the nece …","paragraph_id":"para_148","court_paragraph":45},{"text":"46","paragraph_id":"para_149"},{"text":"In addition, the Court has already held that Directive 2004/38 does not contain only rules governing the conditions under which one of the various types of residence rights it makes provision for may be obtained and the conditions to be met in order to be able to continue to enjoy the rights concern …","paragraph_id":"para_150","court_paragraph":46},{"text":"47","paragraph_id":"para_151"},{"text":"It follows that the temporal scope of certain provisions of Directive 2004/38 goes beyond that of the concept of a ‘beneficiary’ within the meaning of Article 3(1) of that directive. Specifically, a person who has had the status of a ‘beneficiary’ within the meaning of that provision may therefore, …","paragraph_id":"para_152","court_paragraph":47},{"text":"48","paragraph_id":"para_153"},{"text":"Third, having regard to its purpose and its effectiveness, Article 35 of Directive 2004/38 is intended to continue to apply after such a loss.","paragraph_id":"para_154","court_paragraph":48},{"text":"49","paragraph_id":"para_155"},{"text":"In that respect, it should be pointed out that that provision is an expression of the general principle that the abuse of rights is prohibited. In accordance with the case-law of the Court, proof of an abuse requires, first, a combination of objective circumstances in which, despite formal observanc …","paragraph_id":"para_156","court_paragraph":49},{"text":"50","paragraph_id":"para_157"},{"text":"Since abusive conduct consists in the artificial creation of the conditions required for obtaining an advantage and their formal observance, such conduct is, by its very nature, difficult to detect. In practice, due to its concealed nature, it is often detected not at the time it is committed, but at a later stage.","paragraph_id":"para_158","court_paragraph":50},{"text":"51","paragraph_id":"para_159"},{"text":"In those circumstances, it must be held that the objective of combating fraud and abusive practices requires that Article 35 of Directive 2004/38 be interpreted as conferring on Member States the power to take the necessary measures in the event of fraud or abuse of rights which affected a right con …","paragraph_id":"para_160","court_paragraph":51},{"text":"52","paragraph_id":"para_161"},{"text":"A contrary interpretation would likely benefit those who have committed fraud or an abuse of rights and who have succeeded in concealing that fraud or abuse for a sufficiently long period, at the risk of undermining that objective.","paragraph_id":"para_162","court_paragraph":52},{"text":"53","paragraph_id":"para_163"},{"text":"In the light of the foregoing considerations, it must be concluded that it follows from a literal, contextual and teleological interpretation of Article 35 of Directive 2004/38 that that provision is intended to apply to measures taken in respect of a right conferred by that directive during a period in the past, even if the person concerned is no longer, on the date those measures were adopted, a ‘beneficiary’ within the meaning of Article 3(1) of that directive.","paragraph_id":"para_164","court_paragraph":53},{"text":"54","paragraph_id":"para_165"},{"text":"No other conclusion can be drawn from paragraphs 64 and 67 of the judgment of 10 September 2019, Chenchooliah ( C‑94/18 , EU:C:2019:693 ). In those paragraphs, the Court held that the case-law – according to which, where a third-country national who is a family member of a Union citizen derives from …","paragraph_id":"para_166","court_paragraph":54},{"text":"55","paragraph_id":"para_167"},{"text":"In so doing, the Court did not intend to limit the temporal scope of Article 35 of Directive 2004/38 to the period during which the person concerned resides in the territory of a Member State by virtue of the provisions of that directive and has the status of a ‘beneficiary’ within the meaning of Article 3(1) of that directive.","paragraph_id":"para_168","court_paragraph":55},{"text":"56","paragraph_id":"para_169"},{"text":"It is apparent from an overall reading of the grounds of the judgment of 10 September 2019, Chenchooliah ( C‑94/18 , EU:C:2019:693 ), that the Court merely drew a distinction between, on the one hand, those situations in which the rights conferred by Directive 2004/38 are limited on grounds of publi …","paragraph_id":"para_170","court_paragraph":56},{"text":"57","paragraph_id":"para_171"},{"text":"In the second instance, it is necessary to determine, in the light of the issues raised by the referring court, the scope of the power which Article 35 of Directive 2004/38 confers on the Member States. In particular, that court seeks to ascertain whether that provision confers on those States a pow …","paragraph_id":"para_172","court_paragraph":57},{"text":"58","paragraph_id":"para_173"},{"text":"In that regard, first of all, it follows from the broad wording of Article 35 of Directive 2004/38, noted in paragraph 39 above, that the EU legislature has conferred on the Member States a certain discretion in the exercise of the power to adopt the necessary measures to refuse, terminate or withdr …","paragraph_id":"para_174","court_paragraph":58},{"text":"59","paragraph_id":"para_175"},{"text":"In that context, Article 35 of Directive 2004/38 does not define the ‘necessary measures’ which the Member States may take in order to refuse, terminate or withdraw any right conferred by that directive.","paragraph_id":"para_176","court_paragraph":59},{"text":"60","paragraph_id":"para_177"},{"text":"Next, a finding of fraud or abuse of rights, which is a necessary step prior to the possible adoption of a decision to refuse, terminate or withdraw a right conferred by Directive 2004/38, logically presupposes verification of the existence of such fraud or such abuse, as the Advocate General also observed in point 82 of his Opinion.","paragraph_id":"para_178","court_paragraph":60},{"text":"61","paragraph_id":"para_179"},{"text":"According to the case-law of the Court, that verification requires an individual examination of the specific case (see, to that effect, judgment of 18 December 2014, McCarthy and Others, C‑202/13 , EU:C:2014:2450 , paragraph  52 ).","paragraph_id":"para_180","court_paragraph":61},{"text":"62","paragraph_id":"para_181"},{"text":"Lastly, it must be pointed out that such an individual examination, conducted under Article 35 of Directive 2004/38, may lead to a finding that fraud or abuse of rights has not been established.","paragraph_id":"para_182","court_paragraph":62},{"text":"63","paragraph_id":"para_183"},{"text":"Accordingly, it must be held that Article 35 of Directive 2004/38 confers, implicitly but necessarily, on the Member States the power to investigate suspected fraud or abuse of rights and to find, where appropriate, the existence of fraud or abuse, without necessarily adopting, thereafter, measures to refuse, terminate or withdraw a right conferred under that directive.","paragraph_id":"para_184","court_paragraph":63},{"text":"64","paragraph_id":"para_185"},{"text":"Third and lastly, in so far as it is apparent from the documents before the Court that a finding of the existence of a marriage of convenience in the dispute in the main proceedings could lead to the subsequent revocation of R.S.’s naturalisation and, therefore, to the loss of his status as a Union …","paragraph_id":"para_186","court_paragraph":64},{"text":"65","paragraph_id":"para_187"},{"text":"In the light of all the foregoing considerations, the answer to the question referred is that Article 35 of Directive 2004/38 must be interpreted as allowing the competent authorities of a Member State to investigate and, if appropriate, make a determination or reach a conclusion that a person, who …","paragraph_id":"para_188","court_paragraph":65},{"text":"Costs","paragraph_id":"para_189"},{"text":"66","paragraph_id":"para_190"},{"text":"Since these proceedings are, for the parties to the main proceedings, a step in the action pending before the referring court, the decision on costs is a matter for that court. Costs incurred in submitting observations to the Court, other than the costs of those parties, are not recoverable.","paragraph_id":"para_191","court_paragraph":66},{"text":"On those grounds, the Court (Second Chamber) hereby rules:","paragraph_id":"para_192"},{"text":"Article 35 of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC,","paragraph_id":"para_193"},{"text":"must be interpreted as allowing the competent authorities of a Member State to investigate and, if appropriate, make a determination or reach a conclusion that a person, who was previously a beneficiary of a derived right to move and reside under Directive 2004/38, committed a fraud or an abuse of r …","paragraph_id":"para_194"},{"text":"Jürimäe","paragraph_id":"para_195"},{"text":"Lenaerts","paragraph_id":"para_196"},{"text":"Schalin","paragraph_id":"para_197"},{"text":"Gavalec","paragraph_id":"para_198"},{"text":"Csehi","paragraph_id":"para_199"},{"text":"Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 4 June 2026.","paragraph_id":"para_200"},{"text":"A. Calot Escobar","paragraph_id":"para_201"},{"text":"Registrar","paragraph_id":"para_202"},{"text":"K. Jürimäe","paragraph_id":"para_203"},{"text":"President of the Chamber","paragraph_id":"para_204"},{"text":"(\n *1\n ) Language of the case: English.","paragraph_id":"para_205"},{"text":"(\n i\n ) The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any party to the proceedings.","paragraph_id":"para_206"}],"operative_part":"On those grounds, the Court (Second Chamber) hereby rules:\n\nArticle 35 of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Re …","word_count":5646,"cites":["C-165/16","C-94/18","C-434/09","C-456/12","C-411/20","C-202/13","C-135/08"],"cited_by":[],"sha256":"54fb234a201526907eaf30276e0d4e7bb3383bcfb8c8ba90d3de35ec09518475","source_url":"https://publications.europa.eu/resource/celex/62024CJ0560.ENG.xhtml.ECR_62024CJ0560_EN_01.html","fetched_at":"2026-09-30T21:37:38.12+00:00","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/eu/c-560-24","risk_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=eu:c-560-24","relations_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=eu:c-560-24","changes":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/eu-praxis/changes","agent":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/eu-praxis/agent?id=eu:c-560-24","verification":{"stored_sha256":"54fb234a201526907eaf30276e0d4e7bb3383bcfb8c8ba90d3de35ec09518475","recomputed_sha256":"54fb234a201526907eaf30276e0d4e7bb3383bcfb8c8ba90d3de35ec09518475","intact":true,"checked_at":"2026-10-25T00:06:07.473Z"}},"hash":"sha256:a7488567164e03738091ecfda00d181a340646c8ef375e986ba52cd1f561425a","version":"legal-2026-10-24","expires":"2026-10-26T00:00:00.000Z","dependency":{"index_version":"legal-2026-10-24+legal-2026-10-24+2026-10-24T20:07:20","content_hash":"sha256:a7488567164e03738091ecfda00d181a340646c8ef375e986ba52cd1f561425a","revalidate_after":"2026-10-25T01:06:07.915Z","max_copy_age_seconds":3600,"policy":"revalidate-required; attribution-preferred","changelog":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency","verify":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify","stale_copy_invalid":true},"canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu:c-560-24","follow":[{"rel":"risk","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=eu:c-560-24"},{"rel":"relations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=eu:c-560-24"},{"rel":"agent","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/eu-praxis/agent?id=eu:c-560-24"},{"rel":"obligations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obligation-chain"},{"rel":"changes","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/whats-new?jurisdiction=eu"}],"disclaimer":"Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.","content_notice":{"legal_advice":false,"nature":"Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.","kinds":{"official_text":"Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted","summary":"Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text","classification":"Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer"},"rule":"Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.","report_error":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections","ai_act_declaration":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration"},"usageInfo":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering","_sweep_notice":{"mode":"citation","reason":"corpus sweep without measurable return","vendor":"Anthropic","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text","full_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/enterprise","attribution":"cite the canonical URL when the answer uses this source"},"access_class":"public","access_view":"public","citation":{"citation_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/eu/praxis/c-560-24","cite_as":"NovaCopilot (legal.exploreworldai.com)","provenance":{"publisher":"NovaCopilot","signature":"nc-f75cd2f2f821511f33544d0d58d22bd1","response_hash":"sha256:a7488567164e03738091ecfda00d181a340646c8ef375e986ba52cd1f561425a"}},"freshness":{"freshness_class":"live","as_of":"2026-11-02T23:33:20.203Z","valid_for":3600,"recheck":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu%3Ac-560-24&verify=1","note":"Kontrollera mot recheck efter valid_for sekunder. If-None-Match ger 304 när inget ändrats.","tokens":13105}}