Luxemourg, 24/07/2007 (Agence Europe) - On 18 July, Advocate General Juliane Kokott of the European Court of Justice delivered her conclusions in case C-294/06 on the application by three Turkish nationals for renewal of their leave to remain in the United Kingdom. In her opinion, she said that Turkish au pairs could renew their work permit for a second year under the terms of the EEC-Turkey Association Agreement, but Turkish students in the EU did not have the same right, even though they might have worked during their studies.
The EU-Turkey Association Council decided in 1980 to allow any Turkish worker who had been employed in the EU for one year to renew his/her work permit for a second year, on condition that he/she keep the same employer and was “duly registered as belonging to the labour force of a member state” (Article 6, para. 1 of decision Nº 1/80).
Ezgi Payir, a Turkish national, was employed as an au pair in the United Kingdom and held a one-year work permit. Her compatriots Burhan Akyuz and Birol Ozturk arrived in the UK on a “student” visa and worked the permitted 20 hours per week during their stay. On the expiry of their respective permits, they all applied to the secretary of state for the home department for permission to continue to work for their employers for a further year, under the terms of the Association Agreement. The secretary of state did not consider them to be “workers” in the meaning of the agreement, but the High Court of England and Wales, Administrative Court believed they were. Thus it was that the Appeal Court, called on to settle this difference, referred the matter to the European Court of Justice.
The advocate general, in her opinion, considered au pairs as indeed belonging to the labour force, but not students working part-time, even though the number of hours worked may be comparable. According to the advocate general, even though, in the two cases, the parties participated fully in the labour market, the reason for their stay was not the same. In particular, employment was not the main aim of the students' stay; granting a work permit would not, then, be an extension, but an alteration, of their visa. In addition, this alteration could encourage others to undertake studies in the EU with the aim of subsequently obtaining a work permit. This would be counter to the aim of the Association Agreement, that Turkish students should return to Turkey to pass on the knowledge and skills they have acquired and thus contribute them to Turkish society. If the Court agrees with these conclusions, something which happens in three quarters of cases, it will tell the Appeal Court of England and Wales that Ms Payir can have her work permit as an au pair renewed under the terms of the EU-Turkey Association Agreement, but that Messrs Akyuz and Ozturk will have to make a fresh application. (cd)