Skip to content

GlobalLawDBby GenieAI

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Search the text of the law

Log in Get an API key

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Log in Get an API key

The Global Law Database. Free to read, built for people and AI agents.

Explore

All laws
Search the text
Sanctions
Map of connections
Compare UK and EU

Developers

AI agents (MCP)
REST API
Bulk data
API keys

Coverage

United Kingdom
European Union
United States
Canada
Australia
France
Germany
Netherlands
Spain
Austria
Norway
Finland
Switzerland
Ireland

GlobalLawDB is made by GenieAI, London. It is not legal advice: check the official text before relying on it. Text comes from official publishers under their licences, listed on the Data page.

ThemeMatch my systemLightDark

European Union
Natthaya Dülger v Wetteraukreis (C-451/11)
Judgment
The question referred for a preliminar…
38

Natthaya Dülger v Wetteraukreis (C-451/11)

Judgment of 19 Jul 2012law://eu/cjeu/2011/c-451-11/para_38@2026-11-10

38In that regard, it should be noted that the scheme of gradual acquisition of rights which is provided for in the first paragraph of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 pursues a dual objective.

Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Second Chamber
Case: C-451/11 · ECLI:EU:C:2012:504
Decided: 19 Jul 2012
Procedure: Preliminary reference · referred by the Verwaltungsgericht Giessen (Germany)
Applicant: Natthaya Dülger
Defendant: Wetteraukreis
Rapporteur: J.N. Cunha Rodrigues
Advocate General: Y. Bot
Bench: 5 judges
J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, U. Lõhmus, A. Rosas, A. Ó Caoimh, C.G. Fernlund
Language: German
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62011CJ0451

Topics

Association agreements Freedom of movement for workers International agreements

History · 1 version

19 Jul 2012Reading

Connections

Interprets 1: 64/732/EEC: Council Decision of 23 December 1963 on the conclusion of the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Economic Community and Turkey
Cited by 5: BY and Others v Stadt Duisburg (C-194/20); Sidika Ucar and Recep Kilic v Land Berlin (C-508/15, C-509/15)2 provisions; Caner Genc v Integrationsministeriet (C-561/14)2 provisions; United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v Council of the European Union (C-81/13); Naime Dogan v Bundesrepublik Deutschland (C-138/13)
Cites 21: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016)3 provisions; Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (consolidated 2016); Treaty on European Union (consolidated 2016); Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (Text with EEA relevance); Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community; Council Regulation (EEC) No 2760/72 of 19 December 1972 concluding the additional protocol and the financial protocol signed on 23 November 1970 and annexed to the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Economic Community and Turkey and relating to the measures to be taken for their implementation; 80/1/EEC: Commission Decision of 7 December 1979 for the resolution of the dispute between the Kingdom of Denmark and the other Member States over the publication of reference tariffs for the cross-frontier carriage of goods by road; Bestuur van de Sociale Verzekeringsbank v J.M. Cabanis-Issarte (C-308/93); Ismail Derin v Landkreis Darmstadt-Dieburg (C-325/05); Land Baden-Württemberg v Metin Bozkurt (C-303/08); S. Z. Sevince v Staatssecretaris van Justitie (C-192/89); Recep Tetik v Land Berlin (C-171/95); Inan Cetinkaya v Land Baden-Württemberg (C-467/02); Sezgin Ergat v Stadt Ulm (C-329/97); Selma Kadiman v Freistaat Bayern (C-351/95); Staatssecretaris van Justitie v Tayfun Kahveci and Osman Inan (C-7/10, C-9/10); Engin Ayaz v Land Baden-Württemberg (C-275/02); Safet Eyüp v Landesgeschäftsstelle des Arbeitsmarktservice Vorarlberg (C-65/98); Natthaya Dülger v Wetteraukreis (C-451/11); Urszula Ruhr v Bundesanstalt für Arbeit (C-189/00); Sema Sürül v Bundesanstalt für Arbeit (C-262/96)