true, good point, the quoted text did not make it clear if its referring to
"surinder singh" or purely internal situations where there is no prior residence in another EU state.
However the full text of the Supreme Court of Cyprus Case 1241/06 is included at the very end of the document.
ANNEX III: Selected national case law
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/doc_centre/ ... udy_en.pdf
I think, if I'm correct, its referring to purely internal situations where there is no prior residence in another EU state.
There is no mention of these parties having exercised a treaty right in another EU state.
[quote]
Supreme Court of Cyprus
Review Jurisdiction
Case 1241/06
The Republic of Cyprus through the Ministry of Interior, Archive of Population and Immigration
Department,
Respondents
Judgment of Mr. Justice Nicolaides, delivered on the 28th day of July, 2006
“The applicant is a national of Syria who arrived at the Republic on 29.11.2001, at a time when he was given a
temporary residence permit as a visitor. The permit’s duration ended on 6.12.2001. As of then he resides illegally
in the Republic. On 1.12.2005 he married with the Greek Cypriot Eleni Constantinou and some days later he
asked for a temporary work and residence permit as a husband of a Cypriot citizen. His application was rejected
by a decision of the Director of the Archive of Population and Immigration Department, dated 13.2.2006 and he
was asked to arrange his departure. On 30.6.2006 he was arrested by order of arrest and deportation.
The applicant filed an application by which he disputed the respondent’s decision to reject his application for a
residence permit and also disputed the arrest and deportation orders. The present ex parte application by which
the suspension of validity of arrest and deportation is requested.
The applicant supports that he was a right to reside in Cyprus based on the free movement and residence of the
Member States’ citizens and the members of their families, Law of 2003, L. 92(I)/2003. This law secures the
right of free movement and residence of citizens of Member States and the members of their families,
either for paid work or for provision of services. This right is extended to persons that have seized to exercise its
professional activity.
According to Articles 4 and 15, the citizens of Member States who reside or wish to reside in the Republic have
a right to move and reside freely. The spouse and children under 21 years of age have the same right to reside
irrespective of their nationality. Also, the depended older and younger persons and their spouses.
The Applicant supported that the same right of residence and work in Cyprus that the spouses of EU citizens
have, the same right should apply to the spouses of Cypriot citizens, in the context of equal treatment of the
citizens of EU states.
:
:
:
Clearly for reasons of equal treatment of Cypriot citizens with other EU
citizens, we cannot but accept that the rights conferred to relatives of nationals of other member states are granted to the relatives of Cypriots, too.
:
:
The aforementioned view is independent of any probable arguments for violating the right to family life. As it
has been decided (Ioannou v Republic, Case 68/2001) getting married is not sufficient to accept the argument for
interference to family life. It is noted that the Ioannou judgment was issued before the promulgation of Law
92(I)/2003 and before our accession to the EU and was decided upon the general principle of the jurisprudence
of the ECtHR, as protected under article 8 of the ECHR and article 15 of our Constitution.
I conclude that the orders of arrest and deportation are a result of obvious illegality since the provisions of a
particular rule are violated.
An order of suspension of the said orders is issued as requested in paragraph A of the application.â€