Amendment to EEA Regulation from 1/01/2014 Singh diluted

[ulanata]

Hi, many thanks! Sorry, I am not sure I understand- why it will be in our hands soon?

[Casa]

Hi, many thanks! Sorry, I am not sure I understand- why it will be in our hands soon?

Brexit

[Obie]

Hi, many thanks! Sorry, I am not sure I understand- why it will be in our hands soon?

Well in the courts I am sure people will then be able to demonstrate that the changes are indeed unlawful and binding precedent will be set which the SSHD will have to follow.

[mkhan2525]

Hi, many thanks! Sorry, I am not sure I understand- why it will be in our hands soon?

Well in the courts I am sure people will then be able to demonstrate that the changes are indeed unlawful and binding precedent will be set which the SSHD will have to follow.

I guess we will have to rely on a case to reach the Upper Tribunal and then be reported which seems unlikely given the fact that cases are settled in the First Tier Tribunal.

In regards to the "centre of life test", HO are of view that it is lawful according to paragraphs 51-57 of O&B judgmement.

Letter from Robert Goodwill MP to Lord Trefgarne

Thank you for your letter of 9 November regarding the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016 (SI 2016/1052) (“the Regulations”) which raised a number of questions about the wording of some of the provisions, notably: regulation 9 and subparagraphs 7 (c), (e) and (h) of Schedule 1.

Regulation 9(2)(c) specifies that where a British citizen who has exercised free movement rights in another EEA Member State wishes to sponsor an application made by a family member under the EEA Regulations, one of the conditions to be met is that the residence in the other Member State must be, or have been, genuine. This condition subsumes the current ‘centre of life’ test, aligning more closely with the language used in jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (for example, O and B (C-456/12), paragraphs 51 to 57), and will allow a broader range of evidence to be taken into account.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... 7/6707.htm

Does the EU Commission agree with this approach hence no action has been taken against the UK government in the last 3 years despite the promise to do so?

[secret.simon]

For clarity and background, the judgment in O & B (C‑456/12), referenced above.

Also, compliments to mkhan2525 for the research.

[ulanata]

Casa, Obie, mkhan2525, secret.simon - thank you so much! This is very helpful!

[Obie]

Well i feel i need to reopen this thread again, as we have the new amendments to Regulation 9, which purport to give effect to Banger.

I have said many times that Regulation 9 is not a true reflection of Surinder Singh and Eind, and i continue to stand by that position.

Regulation 9(1A) is very controversial, it purpoort to add extended family member to the beneficiaries of regulation 9, but in doing so, it again fell foul of EU law.

In the Court of Appeal Case of Christy, the Home Office sought guidance from the Tribunal on whether or not it will be open to the Home Office to demand that the Extended family member had applied for residence under Article 3(2)(b) in the other member state and was granted in order for the obligation under Article 3(2) to arise upon the return of the British Citizen. Thankfully the court rejected this. It found that it will be wrong to refuse to facilitate in circumstance where as is the case of Christy, she did not need to apply for a Residence card. The court said the Home Office can use the negative decision from another memberstate as a factor to take account of, but not determinative.

Unfortunately in the recent regulation, the Home Office simply ignored the directions they sought and was given by the court. The Home Office simply state that unless the Extended family member was lawfully resident in the other memberstate, there will be no consideration of their case. This is unlawful and will lead to judicial battles. The only positive aspect is that at least they recognised that Regulation 9 and surinder Singh does apply .

[hugmot55]

dont honestly think the eu commission wil care about brit cits

[Johnjk]

Does Eind ruling not apply anymore?
Do British citizens now need to be working on return to UK under Surinder Singh?