Judgement Day for Court case for non EU spouses - C-127/08

It is great to hear this news....as Im in the same situation as everyone in Ireland .....my husband entered Italy a couple of years before we met and married......when we applied for his residence card....as I'm a EU citizen (IRISH) exercising my treaty rights in Italy...and have been doing since 2002.....we were refused (after waiting almost 2 years for a responce) on the basis that he had been illegal before we married.....we then brought the case to court appealing the deicision and are now awaiting the decision of the judge!!! I hope she has seen this new ruling before she makes her decision!!! We have waited so long!!!

Can anybody give me any advise on what I should do should the Italian judge not rule in our favour!!!! Would be most grateful!!!

ciaramc, do you say this is happening to you in Italy?

My wife was "illegal" for 20 days in Italy (expired visa) and she got her residence card the day after the marriage (no fingerprints requested either).

What does he have? a PDS ex art 19? One way to solve this is simply to go back to his home country and apply for a visa per ricongiungimento familiare (family reunion) or familiare al seguito (accompanying family member) They can't deny that visa (based on the Italian Constitution).

Maybe the fact we spoke to the head of the Immigration dept before we married, explaining our situation, had something to do with our luck?

Hey Richard66

We have spoken a couple of times!!!

Yes Italy I remember your story and sorry to say you are one of the lucky ones.....my husband was in Italy a lot longer than 20 days before we married and we have been waiting since 2006 for a responce....we are now awaiting a decision from the Tribunale......

But I think the new sentenza will help us just not sure about how to go about it????

Richard 66??? I was actually thinking of going to the Irish embassy here in Italy and applying for a visa for my husband!!! Ok here in Italy the have not given him a CDS....but he has a right to be here as a spouse of a European citizen exercising her treaty rights??? No?

What do you think?

Hi!
Can someone tell me what we should do now? How long it will take now to get visa if our application was already refused?

voh7 wrote:Was just given this link by a family member these are not my views just thought it was quite interesting.
http://www.eureferendum.blogspot.com/20 ... -mugs.html

More fascist propaganda from the BNP and its sympathizers.

The majority of rejected spouse residency applications under EU mobility rights involves spouses of non-African nationality-- Eastern European, US, Japanese, Korean. The arguments in the article you quoted are representative of the chauvinism and beloved which informs the attitude of the Irish DoJ towards non-EU spouses. The basic argument brought by them to the ECJ was along the lines of Ireland being "taken over by foreigners" --quite telling of the true motivations behind their violations of EU law. The ECJ ruling alludes to this attitude in its formulation.

Ireland has no basis to complain about immigration of EU citizens, which involves rights for their spouses under a EU treaty which the RoI has signed. It should be mentioned that a very large number of Irish nationals live in other EU countries, and that a vast Irish immigration is present in the US. There is a large number of Irish nationals who are in the US illegally, some of them involved with crime.

Double standards are not acceptable.

Ireland is free to pursue an anti-European closed borders policy, provided that it first exits the European Union.

Regarding fears about fertility rates etc (subtly implied in the article you quoted), it should be pointed out that immigrants to Ireland (most of whom are Eastern European rather than African) have lower fertility rates than the Irish population at large. Ireland had one of the highest fertility rates among "Caucasian" populations for the past 60 years, which explains the vastness of the Irish emigration during that period. Irish families with 5 or more siblings are quite common in the RoI.

astartes, please do us all a favour and shut up with your crap, and stop spamming the whole Irish board with your nonsense. Complete pain in the back you are... get a life, or at least try to get on with your current one.

And if you don't like it, then leave...but just stop putting up these silly messages. (and btw... no, I am not Irish but one of the previously affected EU citizens)

astartes wrote:

voh7 wrote:Was just given this link by a family member these are not my views just thought it was quite interesting.
http://www.eureferendum.blogspot.com/20 ... -mugs.html

More fascist propaganda from the BNP and its sympathizers.

The majority of rejected spouse residency applications under EU mobility rights involves spouses of non-African nationality-- Eastern European, US, Japanese, Korean. The arguments in the article you quoted are representative of the chauvinism and beloved which informs the attitude of the Irish DoJ towards non-EU spouses. The basic argument brought by them to the ECJ was along the lines of Ireland being "taken over by foreigners" --quite telling of the true motivations behind their violations of EU law. The ECJ ruling alludes to this attitude in its formulation.

Ireland has no basis to complain about immigration of EU citizens, which involves rights for their spouses under a EU treaty which the RoI has signed. It should be mentioned that a very large number of Irish nationals live in other EU countries, and that a vast Irish immigration is present in the US. There is a large number of Irish nationals who are in the US illegally, some of them involved with crime.

Double standards are not acceptable.

Ireland is free to pursue an anti-European closed borders policy, provided that it first exits the European Union.

Regarding fears about fertility rates etc (subtly implied in the article you quoted), it should be pointed out that immigrants to Ireland (most of whom are Eastern European rather than African) have lower fertility rates than the Irish population at large. Ireland had one of the highest fertility rates among "Caucasian" populations for the past 60 years, which explains the vastness of the Irish emigration during that period. Irish families with 5 or more siblings are quite common in the RoI.

The status of EU citizen is one of dignity. We don't want a Europe of serfs.

Good bye until the next ECJ ruling.

By the way, I am white, a national of a founding country of the EU and don't live in Ireland.

dsab85 wrote:astartes, please do us all a favour and shut up with your crap, and stop spamming the whole Irish board with your nonsense. Complete pain in the back you are... get a life, or at least try to get on with your current one.

And if you don't like it, then leave...but just stop putting up these silly messages. (and btw... no, I am not Irish but one of the previously affected EU citizens)

In all fairness dsab85, I don't know who this guy astartes is but he does seem to have a point. The article he commented on comes across as dearly beloved. Here's from that article:

It is interesting to note that, to illustrate its piece, the BBC shows the hands of a white couple (above), as does the RTE news report embedded by Hibernia girl. Yet, all the appellants were black Africans. Also of interest is that, although this is an EU judgement and applies thus to the UK (and any other member state), the British print media has not reported the story.

http://www.eureferendum.blogspot.com/20 ... -mugs.html

The British media *did* report the story (in particular the BBC). In fact that whole website seems to pander a lot to fears of immigration and does have a neofascist tone.

Just so you don't come back to me with insults, keep in mind I am Irish-American by birth.

astartes wrote:

voh7 wrote:Was just given this link by a family member these are not my views just thought it was quite interesting.
http://www.eureferendum.blogspot.com/20 ... -mugs.html

More fascist propaganda from the BNP and its sympathizers.

The majority of rejected spouse residency applications under EU mobility rights involves spouses of non-African nationality-- Eastern European, US, Japanese, Korean. The arguments in the article you quoted are representative of the chauvinism and beloved which informs the attitude of the Irish DoJ towards non-EU spouses. The basic argument brought by them to the ECJ was along the lines of Ireland being "taken over by foreigners" --quite telling of the true motivations behind their violations of EU law. The ECJ ruling alludes to this attitude in its formulation.

Ireland has no basis to complain about immigration of EU citizens, which involves rights for their spouses under a EU treaty which the RoI has signed. It should be mentioned that a very large number of Irish nationals live in other EU countries, and that a vast Irish immigration is present in the US. There is a large number of Irish nationals who are in the US illegally, some of them involved with crime.

Double standards are not acceptable.

Ireland is free to pursue an anti-European closed borders policy, provided that it first exits the European Union.

Regarding fears about fertility rates etc (subtly implied in the article you quoted), it should be pointed out that immigrants to Ireland (most of whom are Eastern European rather than African) have lower fertility rates than the Irish population at large. Ireland had one of the highest fertility rates among "Caucasian" populations for the past 60 years, which explains the vastness of the Irish emigration during that period. Irish families with 5 or more siblings are quite common in the RoI.[/quote

TRUE SAY TRUE SAY, PEOPLE ALWAYS SEEM TO FORGET THAT NO CONDITION IS PERMANENT.. TRUE SAY MY FRIEND.

You are right mate, i strongly agree with you, i am beginning to wonder as well if some people at the DOJ are not motivated by their dearly beloved views. How then can you explain the misinterpretation of a simple directive. Well analysed mate

And here's from an Irish times article:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ire ... 48297.html

THE DEPARTMENT of Justice is to review the cases of more than 1,500 spouses of EU citizens who were refused residency rights on the basis that they were non-EU nationals.

This follows a ruling by the European Court of Justice which found the Government should not prevent spouses of EU citizens who are not themselves EU citizens from living in the Republic.

The ruling should provide residency rights to significant numbers of non-EU national spouses, who have been served with "intent to deport" notices by the Department of Justice. It will also force the Government to amend a 2006 regulation stipulating that non-EU nationals married to EU citizens must live in another member state before moving to Ireland.

It will not affect Irish citizens married to non-EU nationals.

....

None of the spouses issued with "notice of intent to deport" orders is married to an Irish citizen, but to a citizen of other EU states.

1500 cases is a small number, so why does the Irish Govt make such a fuss and issue deportation threats ? It seems from the above that Irish people's families are treated differently from those of other Europeans.

It's sad to see that Ireland can do such things given how Irish immigrants were treated in the US/UK not that long ago.

The Government, which was supported by several other EU states including Britain and Denmark in the case, had argued that its regulation was necessary to control immigration into the EU due to "strong pressure of migration".It warned that providing non- EU spouses of EU citizens with residency rights would have serious consequences for EU states by bringing about a "great increase" in the amount of people able to gain residency.

All those American and Russian, Ukrainian spouses are such a threat.

The same ideas were used in the past to exclude Irish people in the US and the UK. Apparently "Irish need not apply" has become "non-Irish need not apply". Kind of ironical if you think about it.

Oops.

Martind: The reasons that all articles refer to the fact that this only affects "other" EU citizens and their spouses (while technically incorrect, as Irish citizens who have been exercising their treaty rights elsewhere within the EU should also be affected) and does not change current Irish legislation which governs how the spouses of Irish citizens are treated.

You incorrectly surmise that Irish citizens and their familys are "treated better" than other EU citizens. You are very incorrect. The spouses of Irish citizens have absolultely no right under current Irish law to reside with their Irish spouses in Ireland. This Court Casee which will cause a change to Irish interpretation of the Directive (and to Irish law as a matter of course) will mean that non-EU spouses of other EU citizens will have one again more rights than the non-EU spouses of Irish citizens.

If you read the court case, you will see why these people were issued with Deportation orders. The 4 applicants (non-EU spouses) were all failed asylum seekers. It is the normal process of any country to issue deportation orders to any person who has exhausted the Asylum seeker (and appeals) process. What do you suggest should have happened?

Ciarmc: I suggest you get an Italian copy of the Verdict (available from one of the links on this site) and use this when submitting any claims for residency on the basis of your marriage. I imagine this will strongly affect your situation and if the Italian authorities take the ruling on board, should result in your husband being issued with a Residency Permit.

Regarding applying to the Irish Embassy for a visa based on this directive (i.e. EU1 form), from what I remember on other posts on these Boards, you have to be living in Ireland for at least 4 months before you can apply for this permit. Perhaps something else this Court Case has managed to change? You can always apply for a D-Spouse visa through the Irish embassy, but I doubt this is what you want to get, as it is only valid for Ireland, and your husband would still have to apply for Schengen Visas anytime you wish to exit Ireland. Is your current plan to stay on in Italy or return to Ireland now?

scrudu wrote:Martind: The reasons that all articles refer to the fact that this only affects "other" EU citizens and their spouses (while technically incorrect, as Irish citizens who have been exercising their treaty rights elsewhere within the EU should also be affected) and does not change current Irish legislation which governs how the spouses of Irish citizens are treated.

Thanks for clarifying. Treating Irish people either better or worse than other Europeans is unacceptable. It doesn't matter who is being discriminated against (Irish or non Irish).

You incorrectly surmise that Irish citizens and their familys are "treated better" than other EU citizens. You are very incorrect. The spouses of Irish citizens have absolultely no right under current Irish law to reside with their Irish spouses in Ireland. This Court Casee which will cause a change to Irish interpretation of the Directive (and to Irish law as a matter of course) will mean that non-EU spouses of other EU citizens will have one again more rights than the non-EU spouses of Irish citizens.

The article says that only spouses of non-Irish citizens have received deportation threats. Maybe the Irish Times is confused ? Or maybe Irish people don't enter marriages of convenience ?

If you read the court case, you will see why these people were issued with Deportation orders. The 4 applicants (non-EU spouses) were all failed asylum seekers. It is the normal process of any country to issue deportation orders to any person who has exhausted the Asylum seeker (and appeals) process. What do you suggest should have happened?

Were they the only spouses issued with deportation threats ? It does sound strange that someone married to a EU citizen should be deported, unless the state can prove that it was a marriage of convenience. Was that proven in any of these cases ?

Again, you sound like a defender of the Irish government, which I do not understand. Why would a victim of the situation defend actions already condemned by a European court ?!?

How do you feel about the similarities between Ireland's arguments and what was being said about the "Irish threat"
in the US, UK etc a few decades ago ? It churns my stomach to see such arguments being used by Ireland. Of all people they should know better. Also, I have trouble believing that 1500 people were all in marriages of convenience. All of these people were made to suffer.

I have a German friend who married a Japanese woman in the US years before he came to Ireland for his job (she has a MasterS degree, by the way). He left in disgust last year because of this "rule" which rendered his wife unemployed. He now lives in the UK. How do you excuse what the Irish govt did to his wife ? Do you think this sort of stuff helps Irish-Japanese and Irish-German relations ? His wife's father is in the Japanese Diet (their parliament) -- how do you think this story played with the Japanese government ?

martinb wrote:The article says that only spouses of non-Irish citizens have received deportation threats. Maybe the Irish Times is confused ? Or maybe Irish people don't enter marriages of convenience ?

The article, quite rightly in my opinion, doesn't make any reference to non-EU spouses of Irish citizens as they remain unaffected by this ruling (exception as explained in my last post). To discuss the situation Irish citizens and their non-EU spouses find themselves in, would be to detract attention from the topic at hand, i.e. the effect that this ruling by the ECJ will have on non-EU spouses of other EU citizens. And yes, non-EU spouses of Irish citizens have received deportation orders on the basis that they were not entitled to stay in the country on the basis of their marriage to an Irish citizen. Please don't confuse the situation by dropping in references to "marriages of convenience". This is a seperate matter altogether and remains unchanged by the ECJ ruling. The marriages of non-EU spouses to other EU citizens were never deemd to be "marriages of convenience", but by Irish law, the incorrect interpretation of the EU directive, these non-EU spouses were not entitled to residency on the basis of their marriage to the EU citizen.

martinb wrote:Were they the only spouses issued with deportation threats ?

No, but it was this group you were referring to in your post. I was responding to your post.

martinb wrote:It does sound strange that someone married to a EU citizen should be deported, unless the state can prove that it was a marriage of convenience. Was that proven in any of these cases ?

Considering what Irish law states in it's transposition of the EU directive, it doesn't sound strange at all. I believe it to be an incorrect transposition of EU law, as does the ECJ, but that was the law for the last 2-3 years. It was on the basis of this law (which stated that the couple must firstly reside in another EU state before coming to Ireland) that many non-EU spouses of EU citizens were denied residency. It was the law remember, incorrect or not.

martinb wrote:Again, you sound like a defender of the Irish government, which I do not understand.

I'm not sure where you get idea from. Please provide quotes from any of my posts where I show sympathy for the Irish Government and Immigration policy here? I just do not feel the need to voice my opinions in each post for each new poster. I am simply responding to the posts that went before. Please do not try to read into my motives based on my posts. My posts speak for themselves. I have been opposed to the policies of the DoJ, the former and current Minsters for Justice, and INIS for quite a long time.

martinb wrote:Also, I have trouble believing that 1500 people were all in marriages of convenience.

I should hope that you do. I imagine the vast majority of them were. But no-one has ever said that they were marriages of convenience. Again, you are mixing up two issues here. Read my first point regarding this.

Wow. You seem to be better informed than the Irish times, and very knowledgeable of Irish politics.

Unusual for a simple immigrant.

My friend married his wife in the US a few years before being sent to Ireland by his company. Definitely not a marriage of convenience.

Ever heard about the Abe family ? This guy is one of her relatives:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinzo_Abe

One never knows who one is screwing with. I bet that her treatment did wonders for the image of Ireland in Japan.

Scrudu: I have already applied and was refused on the basis that my husband had been here illegally before we married we are now waiting for the outcome of our appeal....but we have already submitted all our documents for the judge to consider 2 weeks ago...we are hoping she will take into account this new sentence...I have already printedit out in Italian and sent it in last FRIDAY when I new the outcome!!!
But of course the Italian courts close for yes 1 and a half months 1 of August til the 15 of September so we will probably have to wait til then to get our answer???? We have already been waiting since 2006.....

I really want to move home (Ireland)......but as my hubby was never issued a residency card we could never apply for visa...now I'm just thinking of going to the Embassy( Irish one in Italy) and applying.....as Italy should have already issued the residence card based on the fact that he is a spouse of a EU citizen!!! I think they will probably turn us down....but this sentence from the European court should really help!! We want to get a spouse visa then use the EU1 applying as a spouse who has exercised their treaty rights in Europe that way my hubby would not have to apply for a schengen visa for Europe!!

Any advise much appreciated!!

martind wrote:Wow. You seem to be better informed than the Irish times, and very knowledgeable of Irish politics.

Unusual for a simple immigrant.

MartinD, I think we can all do without your patronizing tone...
Do you have anything interesting to add to this thread without hijacking it into another rant?
thanks.

Martind read the posts carefully....SCRUDU is an Irish citizen....with a third country spouse!!!

And sorry I have to agree....it is not only EU citizen's with non EU Spouses that are effected by the Doj but also Irish citizens with non EU spouses!!

We are all in the same kinda boat??? And believme it's not only Ireland!!! Many European countries interpret the Directive wrongly.....