Coman v Inspectoratul General pentru Imigrări
A Member State must recognise a same sex marriage concluded in another Member State for the purpose of granting a right of residence to the non EU spouse of an EU citizen.
Facts
Mr Coman, a Romanian and American national, married Mr Hamilton, an American national, in Belgium, where Mr Coman had been living and working. When they wanted to move to Romania, the Romanian authorities refused to grant Mr Hamilton a right of residence as Mr Coman's spouse, because Romanian law did not recognise same sex marriages.
Legal principle
The Court of Justice held that the term spouse in the Citizens' Rights Directive is gender neutral, and that a Member State cannot refuse to grant a right of residence to the non EU same sex spouse of an EU citizen, where the marriage was lawfully concluded in another Member State during a period of genuine residence there. Member States remain free to decide whether to allow same sex marriage in their own law, but refusing to recognise such a marriage for the purpose of residence rights would restrict the citizen's freedom of movement, and could not be justified on grounds of public policy or national identity.
Related cases on EU citizenship
- Baumbast and R v Secretary of State for the Home Department Case C-413/99, [2002] ECR I-7091
- Dano v Jobcenter Leipzig Case C-333/13, EU:C:2014:2358
- Dereci v Bundesministerium für Inneres Case C-256/11, [2011] ECR I-11315
- Garcia Avello v Belgium Case C-148/02, [2003] ECR I-11613
- Grzelczyk v Centre Public d'Aide Sociale d'Ottignies-Louvain-la-Neuve Case C-184/99, [2001] ECR I-6193
- Jobcenter Berlin Neukölln v Alimanovic Case C-67/14, EU:C:2015:597
- Land Baden-Württemberg v Tsakouridis Case C-145/09, [2010] ECR I-11979
- Martínez Sala v Freistaat Bayern Case C-85/96, [1998] ECR I-2691
Studying EU Law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
