Facts: the applicants were two Turkish nationals who were both legally resident in Austria, and who were married. The man was a Turkish migrant worker. The couple divorced later but continued to live together and subsequently had four children. They later remarried. Mrs Eyup accepted an offer of permanent employment which required her to obtain a work permit from the Austrian authorities. She applied for this but her claim was rejected on the grounds that Article 7 of the Decision applied to spouses, not cohabitees who did not live 5 years together married.

Complaint: Mrs Eyup claimed a violation of Article 8 ECHR as a means of supporting her claim under Community law.

Holding: the ECJ ruled that

Reasoning: the Convention may be referred to as an aid to the interpretation of the first paragraph of Article 7, Decision 1/80 governing the work permit authorization.  Community law must also be interpreted in the light of the requirement of respect for family life governed by Article 8 of the Convention. Given the nature of the applicant’s relationship with Mr Eyup, the two periods of marital status could be aggregated to meet the five year requirement of Article 7 Decision 1/80.

Human and Constitutional Rights Resource Page