European citizens have been exposed to social exclusion risks due to the economic crisis and the retrenchment in the welfare state budget. Among those exposed, we find workers and self-employed workers. The Member States of Central and Northern Europe have tried to restrict the free movement of workers and the self-employed and limit access to social benefits for European citizens from Eastern Europe. On the other hand, the European institutions have tried to save the notion of the European citizen as the promoter of the integration process. Recently, the Court of Justice seems to have reprised the role of bulwark against the social exclusion of migrant European citizens in the host Member State. Adding to Florea Gusa and Tarola, the Dakneviciute case law confirms the new interpretative trend of the Court of Justice towards greater protection of the migrant self-employed worker who needs to access the welfare of the host Member State in a period of vulnerability. The recommendation is that this course continues, allowing us to overcome the restrictive jurisprudence developed in the Dano trend.

由于经济危机和福利国家预算的缩减，欧洲公民面临着被社会排斥的风险。在那些被暴露的人中，我们找到了工人和自雇工人。中欧和北欧成员国试图限制工人和个体经营者的自由流动，并限制东欧欧洲公民获得社会福利。另一方面，欧洲机构试图挽救欧洲公民作为一体化进程的推动者的观念。最近，法院似乎已经重新行使了壁垒的作用，以防止在东道国对移民欧洲公民的社会排斥。添加到弗洛雷亚谷萨和Tarola的Dakneviciute判例法确认了法院的新的解释趋势，即在脆弱时期内需要为东道国提供福利的移民自雇工人得到更大的保护。建议继续该课程，以使我们能够克服达诺趋势中发展的限制性法学。