From Law wiki, the wiki for law research

C-292/89. The applicant was a Belgian national who had entered the UK to look for work -- an endeavour in which he had not been successful. The UK authorities sought to deport him after he was convicted of drugs-related criminal offence. The applicant relied on Art. 39 of the ECTreaty which sets out to protect the Free Movement Of Workers. The UK, however, argued that the claimant, being unemployed, was not a worker and therefore not entitled to the protection of Art. 39.

The European Court of Justice adopted a very purposive reading of Art. 39. While it was true, it was conceded, that Art. 39 did not specifically address the status of those seeking work, the provisions of the Treaty would be seriously hindered if free movement only applied to those who already had offers of employment in other member states. It followed that Art. 39 had to extend protection to people who were unemployed and actively seeking work, such as the claimant.

The UK argued that it was unreasonable to expect a member state to host a non-national indefinitely while he sought employment, and that a period of three months would be reasonable. The ECJ preferred a period of six months, but added that if a person could prove at the end of that time that he still had a good chance of finding work, it would be unacceptable for the state to deport him.

However, the ECJ did point out that an unemployed person would not necessarily be entitled to the full package of rights guaranteed by the Treaty.