INTRODUCTION

The previous two chapters have been devoted to the discussion of the scope of EU competence in child relocation and the European framework of fundamental rights respectively. It has been shown that the EU competence is heavily limited, and the jurisprudence of the ECtHR leaves national authorities with a wide margin of appreciation in child relocation. Having highlighted how these discussions constitute an important point of reference for the analysis of child relocation as a restriction of EU free movement, it is now time to consider how the CJEU could legitimately interpret EU law if a child relocation case ever came to the Court. While family law remains among the areas of law most closely associated with national sovereignty and no legislation on child relocation exists on the EU level, EU law has long been recognised as capable of influencing such national law, with the CJEU being the ‘real engine’ of the process via its interpretations of the free movement provisions. Free movement is, indeed, the main trigger for a closer scrutiny of national child relocation provisions and measures in the EU context. The literature recognises that restrictions on child relocation might potentially be perceived as a restriction of EU law, requiring an adaptation of national child relocation laws and approaches to EU legal obligations. The first discussion of child relocation in the EU context goes back to the times of workers’ mobility provided by the Rome Treaty, but it is, in particular, the current legal framework expanded by the EU citizenship provisions that calls for more research on the topic, as outlined by Ruth Lamont.