Opinion of Advocate General Darmon delivered on 2 December 1992

1 Original language: French.

2 Decision of the national court, p. 3 of the French translation.

3 I.2, in fine.

4 OJ, English Special Edition 1968 (II), p. 475.

5 OJ, English-Special Edition 1968 (II), p. 485.

6 Emphasis added.

7 Article 2(2) of the Treaty of 28 May 1979 between the Member States and the Hellenic Republic on the accession of that country to the EEC and Euratom (OJ 1979 L 291, p. 9).

8 See Article 44 of the Act of Accession, which lays down the principle that of Article 48 of the Treaty is to apply immediately (OJ 1979 L 291, p. 17).

9 Article 45 of the Act of Accession.

10 Ibid.

11 Case C-305/87 [1989] ECR 1461. See also paragraph 11 of the judgment in Case 9/88 Lopes da Veiga [1989] ECR 2989.

12 Paragraph 15, emphasis added.

13 Paragraph 16. Article 9 concerns unequal treatment in the matter of accommodation between national workers and workers who are nationals of the other Member States.

14 Paragraph 9 (see reference to the judgment, note 10, above). See also paragraph 11 of the judgment.

15 Case 77/82 [1983] ECR 1085.

16 See, in relation to the Act of Accession of Portugal, the Lopes da Veiga judgment, paragraph 10.

17 Case 139/85 Kempf v Staatssecretaris van Justitie [1986] ECR 1741, paragraph 15.

18 Case 53/81 Levin v Staatssecretaris van Justitie [1982] ECR 1035, paragraph 13 and the Kempf judgment, paragraph 13.

19 See the Act concerning the Conditions of Accession of the Kingdom of Spain and the Portuguese Republic and the Adaptations of the Treaties (OJ 1985 L 302, p. 23), Article 57(1 )(a) of which provides in its second subparagraph for a right of access to any employment for members of the family of a worker established in another Member State at a date prior to the signature of the Act of Accession.

20 Paragraphs 16 and 21, respectively.

21 Observations of the Commission, p. 7 of the French translation.

22 Case 48/75 [1976] ECR 497, paragraph 31.

23 Cited above, paragraph 9.

24 See paragraph 13 of my Opinion in the Antonissen case (cited below, note 24).

25 Case C-292/89 The Queen v The Immigration Appeal Tribunal, ex parte Antonissen [1991] ECR I-745.

26 Paragraph 21.

27 Paragraph 22.

28 See Article 1(10) of the Proposal for a Council Directive 89/C/100/07 amending Directive 68/360/EEC on the abolition of restrictions on movement and residence within the Community for workers of Member States and their families, submitted by the Commission on 11 January 1989 (OJ 1989 C 100, p. 8).

29 See the medical certifícate of 22 December 1987 and the statement of the employment office of 19 March 1987 referred to by the national court in its decision, p. 3 of the French translation.

30 OJ 1990 L 180, p. 26.

31 This measure entered into force on 1 July 1992.

32 Article 1(1).

33 Article 1(2). Council Directive 90/365/EEC of 28 June 1990 on the right of residence for employed and selfemployed workers who have ceased their occupational activity (OJ 1990 L 180, p. 28) does not appear to be applicable, since the appellant in the main proceedings is not a worker within the meaning of that directive.

34 OJ, English Special Edition 1970 (II), p. 402.