Brussels, 19/03/2015 (Agence Europe) - On Thursday 19 March, Advocate General Juliane Kokott, said EU member states could be allowed to introduce a compulsory integration exam for family reunification purposes for third country nationals, as long as the costs involved in this examination are not disproportionate to the candidate in question.
The Dutch Council of State (Raad van State) asked the European Court of Justice (C-153/14) whether the country's civic integration examination is compatible with Community law. This two-part examination is to demonstrate that the candidate has a basic knowledge of the Dutch language and society. It applies to almost all non-EU nationals but under bilateral agreements with the US and Canada, these two countries' nationals are exempt. Each exam costs €350, paid by the candidate and provides a self-study pack in 18 languages at a one-off cost of €110.
In her conclusions, Advocate General Juliane Kokott expresses the view that the civic integration examination at issue here is in principle a permissible integration measure within the meaning of the directive on family reunification (2003/86/EC). She believes that this is justifiable because learning the language of a country is an essential prerequisite for integration and a basic knowledge of a country and also ensures that the person coming to join the family is familiar with important fundamental rules of co-existence.
The Dutch Council State, however, must carry out a two-point analysis to ensure that Dutch legislation is not disproportionate. This involves checking whether candidates can be exempted the exam in situations of personal hardship by taking into account the state of health, their cognitive abilities and level of education. It is also necessary to ensure that the documents for preparing for the exam have been sufficiently understood and that the candidates are not penalised if the start-up packs are not available in their mother tongue. Finally, Dutch legislation would be incompatible with the Directive if the civic integration examination requirement applies even where that requirement is unreasonable for the person intending to join his family, taking into account his individual circumstances, or where, on account of the special circumstances of an individual case, there are grounds on which family reunification should be granted notwithstanding the failure to pass the examination.
The only point in the Dutch legislation that the Advocate General considers incompatible with the European directive involves the examination fee because at €350 it is likely to prevent a candidate's right to family reunification. Kokott believes that this is a disproportionate obstacle with regard to the financial restraints of many non-EU nationals and that Dutch rules should ensure that in such cases, a solution could lie, inter alia, in measures for a dispensation or deferral. (Jan Kordys)