Acceso usuarios
Stephanie Reynolds
The recent decision in Iida contributes to a growing line of case law on the genuine enjoyment test in EU citizenship law. When introduced in Ruiz Zambrano, this new test appeared to mark the beginning of the end for the oft-criticised but long-maintained wholly internal rule. And yet, the application of the new test in subsequent case law has been highly restrictive. This is due to the Court's insistence, explicit in Iida, that the genuine enjoyment test retains an "intrinsic connection to free movement". While this approach is understandable in light of the difficulty in characterising the scope of, and rights associated with, the new test, its consequence is that the ability of the genuine enjoyment test to encroach upon the wholly internal situation is relatively limited. Conversely, the ongoing link between genuine enjoyment and free movement means, ironically, that the more significant outcome of the new test is its encroachment upon the protection offered by cross-border movement. Moreover, while it was hoped that the new test would address many of the inequalities associated with the wholly internal situation, the preserved connection between genuine enjoyment and free movement means that the new test simply perpetuates them.
