In the case of Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali/GBR in 1985 the ECtHR suggested for the first time that the right to respect for private and family life in accordance with Article 8 of the ECHR might entail a right to family reunification. 18 years later, the Member States of the European Community agreed on the Family Reunification Directive 2003/86/EC. The aim of this thesis is to investigate, if there is a right to family reunification within Article 8 ECHR or within the directive. At the beginning of this thesis, the scope of Art 8 ECHR will be elucidated. Therefore the first part focuses on the analysis of the most important judgments of the ECtHR. The second part deals with the content of the directive and the related jurisdiction of the ECJ. In addition, the special situation of refugees will be highlighted in both chapters. Furthermore, similar and different approaches of the two European courts will be shown in comparing the mentioned judgements. Finally, a legal policy perspective will illustrate, if the case law of Art 8 ECHR would prospectively legitimize a right to family reunification and if a revision of the directive would be advisable. After an intense investigation of the judicature, different results can be found. The ECtHR sticks to the principle, that Art 8 ECHR could only grant a right to family reunification under certain conditions. Ultimately, a fair balance has to be struck between the competing interest of the individual and of the community as a whole. In contrast, the ECJ has repeatedly confirmed, that the directive contains a specific right to family reunification for certain family members. Refugees are privileged by the ECJ and ECtHR, but a right to family reunification is only guaranteed by the directive.