ESC

Click the "allow" button if you want to receive important news and updates from immigrationboards.com


Immigrationboards.com: Immigration, work visa and work permit discussion board

Welcome to immigrationboards.com!

Login Register Do not show

Partners EU1 application refused on basis of dual citizen!!!

Forum to discuss all things Blarney | Ireland immigration

Moderators: Casa, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, Zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, geriatrix, John, ChetanOjha, archigabe, push, Administrator

Locked
Obie
Moderator
Posts: 14657
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 12:06 am
Location: UK/Ireland
Ireland

Post by Obie » Tue May 31, 2011 12:59 pm

This is quite a disproportionate responce. Touched a nerve have i. It seems like your years at that failed department, thanks to Mr Shatters who is seeking to reform it, has had an adverse impact on you. It seems like you forgot your sense of humour in the drawer when you left, or the amount of immigrant and IBC application cases you had to deal with made you a very angry person.

Firstly there is a clear distinction between a black person and an african person. It will be right to say most african people are black, but not all african people are black. African by definition are people who are from the African continent. This could be a white South African, or an Asian south African or Ugandan. But with that narrow minded lovely mindset of yours, i am not surprised you took offence. I was never intending to stir up a facial debate, just seeking to be friendly.

I don't agree with you that African people have a chip on their shoulder. As far as i can see, it is you that has a chip on his shoulder, constantly talking about Nigerian people abusing asylum an IBC scheme, when people were simply abiding by the Law of the land. Advocating that the Nigerian woman, who married to the Irish guy and has children by him should be removed. Thanks to Zambrano, your wishes did not come true.

I don't support marriages of convenience, and there is no evidence or indication from any of my post that i contract it.

Linking people up has wider meaning than your narrow mind will lead you to believe. Pimps control prostitutes they sell them for financial gains. I never suggested that. I was simply seeking to lighten up your dull life.

I wish your future wife all the best. Perhaps she should have a look at some of your post , so she is aware what she is letting herself in to.

You should know that once a person is considered a community worker and found to have a right under Article 39 now Article 45 TFEU, she can invoke any provision that were implemented to ensure this rights is realised without any deterance.
Black life matters.

walrusgumble
BANNED
Posts: 1279
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:30 am
Location: ireland

Post by walrusgumble » Tue May 31, 2011 5:04 pm

Obie wrote:This is quite a disproportionate responce. Touched a nerve have i. It seems like your years at that failed department, thanks to Mr Shatters who is seeking to reform it, has had an adverse impact on you. It seems like you forgot your sense of humour in the drawer when you left, or the amount of immigrant and IBC application cases you had to deal with made you a very angry person.

Firstly there is a clear distinction between a black person and an african person. It will be right to say most african people are black, but not all african people are black. African by definition are people who are from the African continent. This could be a white South African, or an Asian south African or Ugandan. But with that narrow minded lovely mindset of yours, i am not surprised you took offence. I was never intending to stir up a facial debate, just seeking to be friendly.



I don't agree with you that African people have a chip on their shoulder. As far as i can see, it is you that has a chip on his shoulder, constantly talking about Nigerian people abusing asylum an IBC scheme, when people were simply abiding by the Law of the land. Advocating that the Nigerian woman, who married to the Irish guy and has children by him should be removed. Thanks to Zambrano, your wishes did not come true.

I don't support marriages of convenience, and there is no evidence or indication from any of my post that i contract it.

Linking people up has wider meaning than your narrow mind will lead you to believe. Pimps control prostitutes they sell them for financial gains. I never suggested that. I was simply seeking to lighten up your dull life.

I wish your future wife all the best. Perhaps she should have a look at some of your post , so she is aware what she is letting herself in to.

You should know that once a person is considered a community worker and found to have a right under Article 39 now Article 45 TFEU, she can invoke any provision that were implemented to ensure this rights is realised without any deterance.
Do you know what the word disproportionate means? You made a number of comments which I responded to in full,

"seems like you forgot your sense of humour in the drawer when you left, or the amount of immigrant and IBC application cases you had to deal with made you a very angry person."

There is nothing humourous of tossers making issues of the colour of their skin , especially if trying to proof a point, when its uncalled for./Unnessary. Don't enter a debate or discussion if one is going to resort to it, unless you are attacked on that basis. No one likes people who have rediculous delusions of self righteousness and demands everything when they are not entitled to same.

Lets not get all high horses,shall we,

"Firstly there is a clear distinction between a black person and an african person. It will be right to say most african people are black, but not all african people are black. African by definition are people who are from the African continent. This could be a white South African, or an Asian south African or Ugandan. But with that narrow minded lovely mindset of yours, i am not surprised you took offence. I was never intending to stir up a facial debate, just seeking to be friendly. "

Where did I lump blacks and Africans together and suggest Black people are the only people in Africa? (Others come from sunny climates like Carribaenan and USA) , my last post stated that there are many EU citizens who are black and that some are of the African Community. Why was there a need to make a comment about one's colour. Could you not have simply said girl? I note that you were being humourous, and looking from a funky sign about a bar in another post, it was clear that humour was imputted.

Considering that there is still a strong white Irish - British community in South Africa and South African Business, which I have to frequent quite a bit, wow, well done , only for your genuis, imagine I would never have known that. Before making statements suggesting bigatory how about thinking before you typing such statements.

"I don't support marriages of convenience, and there is no evidence or indication from any of my post that i contract it

Linking people up has wider meaning than your narrow mind will lead you to believe. Pimps control prostitutes they sell them for financial gains. I never suggested that. I was simply seeking to lighten up your dull life."

Ah no, not at all and I really was not suggesting it. Hence why I put a winking emocticon on. I was being a sacrastic smart arse there and did not intend to offend. As you have suggested in your earlier post, where has your sense of humour gone? The pimp bit was intended to be a back hand compliment actually , like your man in Starky and Hutch (though, now come to think of it, I think he was a full on pimp). A bit childish.

Link up? Nah I am a "hook up", "scope", "sting up" or "organise" man meself :lol:




"don't agree with you that African people have a chip on their shoulder. As far as i can see, it is you that has a chip on his shoulder, constantly talking about Nigerian people abusing asylum an IBC scheme, when people were simply abiding by the Law of the land. Advocating that the Nigerian woman, who married to the Irish guy and has children by him should be removed. Thanks to Zambrano, your wishes did not come true."

Ah no, for most part Africans are sound. But that was only a question for you to last respond, and the response of others over the history of this thread and the criticism of non eu people regarding immigration laws. Moore Street you get some interesting characters. The Ghanian are decent crowd, seem most relaxed. But some people, are just ridiculous.
But there are people on this site who are Africans and they do act like they have a chip on their shoulder when they don't like hearing something they do not like.

I was asked whether I thought the Old Immigration Bill was Fair. I say, in some parts, the parts that may happen to concern you, I said yes, I have explained why I think it is fair. I was told by one poster that I was "condeming Muslims". I asked what they meant by that, as expected, no response.

The IBC is one of the main reasons why its fair. The Irish actually (use to)pride them selves on being the land of a thousand welcomes, and people were and are still royally pissed off that that welcome was abused , in most cases. Can you deny that there was a bit of a baby boom/ I brought it up as I was actually asked whether I think the Immigration Bill was fair. The person who asked also said "and no lying".

The IBC issue is very relevant as many of the cases before the High Court and many cases (which posters have regularly pointed out) involving those who were deported mostly involved fathers of children who never came over during the IBC 05 scheme, but later. They now rely on Zambrano. I was criticised for taking the opposite view on Zambrano. I explained why I was critical of it; 1 - IBC & 2. Interference of the ECJ in internal matters

When I am asked something, I will answer.

So, it is incorrect to suggest that I raise that thorny issue unprovoked and its only a response to the hysterical horror raised by people about the cases of deported parents, some who clealy were not that bothered about their kids (ie people who came over much later leaving the mother alone in the State). It merely has been a line of defence raised by the State in every case since, from Lobe, Bode, Dimbo, the State submissions in Chen and the State's Submissions in Zambrano. And, it would have been used by the State if the pending cases where still going to be challenged - albeit in a far politier way.

You never answered the questions put forward. Do you think that it was correct for people who intentionally used the asylum system to make a "better life" and intentionally told lies about their countries. If you came to Ireland via work permit and tolerated alot of crap which these people did tolerate, how would you feel to learn that your neighbour, who happens to be from the same country as you, told the Irish authorities alot of lies about your country? I would love to see your reaction if the shoe was on your foot.


As for taking offence, hardly, I have long gave you on taking people like you seriously.

"I wish your future wife all the best. Perhaps she should have a look at some of your post , so she is aware what she is letting herself in to. "

thanks. Getting herself into what?mortage, children lol. People in Ireland want people not to abuse our system and enter Ireland correctly and leave when they are no longer entitled to stay. Hardly a new thing.Neither is it contraversial, well it is as people like R&R and self interest groups prevent such discussions (fair enough if it means that idiots like BNP and Immigration Platform won't get heard) but it was an issue that needs to be discussed. Ah, but you want to prattle on that its dearly beloved to have such views? Go knock yourself out sure.

Dull Life? I really wish it was, never get time to myself. Life of boring airports, taxis, trains are not nice. Oh well , hit 40 in a decade and a bit and boring golf course or a game of cards, oh yes.

If she saw the INIS and GNIB files of some, I think she would be far far worse. Somehow, there is little to suggest that she or many others would be objected to. Maybe the manner in which it can be expressed, but, eye for an eye and rudeness for rudeness is what I always say.,

Something would tell me she would think I am jolly odd for helping my non eu friends and acquintances if I was the type of person you insinuate.


I think we should get back on topic. You want to discuss this, PM, instead.

Monifé
Senior Member
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 5:42 pm
Location: Dublin

Post by Monifé » Wed Jun 01, 2011 3:33 pm

Please do take the bickering and debates to another thread or private message.

This exact thing is what got my thread locked and I had to request for it to be unlocked.
beloved is the enemy of freedom, and deserves to be met head-on and stamped out - Pierre Berton

leonex4t5
Member
Posts: 103
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:33 am
Contact:

Post by leonex4t5 » Wed Jun 01, 2011 4:17 pm

hello...

My Wife is a British Citizen living in the uk at the moment, But She wants to go to france for 3months to study french when she get back to the UK would she be qualified as an EEA national who has excercised treaty right?
Hard Work = Sucess!

walrusgumble
BANNED
Posts: 1279
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:30 am
Location: ireland

Post by walrusgumble » Wed Jun 01, 2011 9:35 pm

she is exercising her rights when she leaves the uk. there are no restrictions for first 3 months.in reality she wont be bothered by authorities.but if she wants family reuification of non eu spouse after 3 months she needs to comply with article 7 of directive 2004 / 38 ec (student-comprehensive health insurance & recognised educational institute, or other groung, self sufficiency) technically caselaw provides that she can use eu law ie family reunification in uk on return.it would be wise for non eu spouse to go with her,register with french authorities (proof,making it hard for uk to say no) maybe stay in france a little longer for 3 months (not neccessary)have loads of proves of residence & exercising rights.then return to uk.uk have similar domestic policy like ireland.only way around this is to leave uk & invoke eu law by returning

daddy
Member of Standing
Posts: 266
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 12:08 am

not fully correct

Post by daddy » Wed Jun 01, 2011 9:50 pm

walrusgumble wrote:she is exercising her rights when she leaves the uk. there are no restrictions for first 3 months.in reality she wont be bothered by authorities.but if she wants family reuification of non eu spouse after 3 months she needs to comply with article 7 of directive 2004 / 38 ec (student-comprehensive health insurance & recognised educational institute, or other groung, self sufficiency) technically caselaw provides that she can use eu law ie family reunification in uk on return.it would be wise for non eu spouse to go with her,register with french authorities (proof,making it hard for uk to say no) maybe stay in france a little longer for 3 months (not neccessary)have loads of proves of residence & exercising rights.then return to uk.uk have similar domestic policy like ireland.only way around this is to leave uk & invoke eu law by returning
Walrumgamble, your are missing something out, she has to have exercised her right as economically active person in france, not as a student, and for at least 6 months before returning with her non eu family members to UK, if not so, UKBA will refuse you residence card.May I ask, what about you application based on zambrano you made, whats updates.
Daddy.
Daddy.

walrusgumble
BANNED
Posts: 1279
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:30 am
Location: ireland

Post by walrusgumble » Wed Jun 01, 2011 10:43 pm

daddy: i would fully agree that it would be better to do six months or more.but the shing case says nothing about how long you have to stay.you can be one day in mainland europe, you are exercising your rights. article 7 provides for students & self sufficency,not just being economic,its a confirmation of old liberal caselaw.but yes, it would be better to get a job for at least 6 months.i am not an immigrant.but expect to know more on zambrano by august.if you have stamp 1,2,3 go to gnib to register now

acme4242
Senior Member
Posts: 604
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 12:03 pm

Post by acme4242 » Wed Jun 01, 2011 10:57 pm

walrusgumble wrote:daddy: i would fully agree that it would be better to do six months or more.but the shing case says nothing about how long you have to stay.you can be one day in mainland europe, you are exercising your rights. article 7 provides for students & self sufficency,not just being economic,its a confirmation of old liberal caselaw.but yes, it would be better to get a job for at least 6 months.i am not an immigrant.but expect to know more on zambrano by august.if you have stamp 1,2,3 go to gnib to register now
walrusgumble, yes, this is what it should be.
But as daddy said, the UK don't recognise adult education as exercising
treaty rights for Surrinder Singh route reunification.

They impose the narrowest implementation.

leonex4t5
Member
Posts: 103
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:33 am
Contact:

Post by leonex4t5 » Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:34 am

thanks for all your contributions. ukba returned my application saying there was know provision to issue me with a document from the EEA2 department.(directive 2004/38). i spoke to an advocate who said FLR(0) form is the appropriate form to use together with a cover letter stating zambrano, and possibly zh (tanzania). and also to provide as much evidence as possibly to show you play a major role in the child life.
Hard Work = Sucess!

leonex4t5
Member
Posts: 103
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:33 am
Contact:

Post by leonex4t5 » Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:38 am

Hard Work = Sucess!

walrusgumble
BANNED
Posts: 1279
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:30 am
Location: ireland

Post by walrusgumble » Thu Jun 02, 2011 8:49 am

acme4242 wrote:
walrusgumble wrote:daddy: i would fully agree that it would be better to do six months or more.but the shing case says nothing about how long you have to stay.you can be one day in mainland europe, you are exercising your rights. article 7 provides for students & self sufficency,not just being economic,its a confirmation of old liberal caselaw.but yes, it would be better to get a job for at least 6 months.i am not an immigrant.but expect to know more on zambrano by august.if you have stamp 1,2,3 go to gnib to register now
walrusgumble, yes, this is what it should be.
But as daddy said, the UK don't recognise adult education as exercising
treaty rights for Surrinder Singh route reunification.

They impose the narrowest implementation.
They (UK) don't recognise it at all? Even genuine study (2-4 years in Univeristy)?

How do they get away with that?

It does sound far too good to be true as anyone would then claim to be students. 3 months was defintely way too short and UK would seriously cause suspicion, especially if it caused a trend.

Any links to any cases from the UK courts and Tribunal?

acme4242
Senior Member
Posts: 604
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 12:03 pm

Post by acme4242 » Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm

walrusgumble wrote:
acme4242 wrote:
walrusgumble wrote:daddy: i would fully agree that it would be better to do six months or more.but the shing case says nothing about how long you have to stay.you can be one day in mainland europe, you are exercising your rights. article 7 provides for students & self sufficency,not just being economic,its a confirmation of old liberal caselaw.but yes, it would be better to get a job for at least 6 months.i am not an immigrant.but expect to know more on zambrano by august.if you have stamp 1,2,3 go to gnib to register now
walrusgumble, yes, this is what it should be.
But as daddy said, the UK don't recognise adult education as exercising
treaty rights for Surrinder Singh route reunification.

They impose the narrowest implementation.


They (UK) don't recognise it at all? Even genuine study (2-4 years in Univeristy)?

How do they get away with that?

It does sound far too good to be true as anyone would then claim to be students. 3 months was defintely way too short and UK would seriously cause suspicion, especially if it caused a trend.

Any links to any cases from the UK courts and Tribunal?
UK, regulation 9 of the 2006 Regulations
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2006 ... ion/9/made

more info in the UK 2004/38/EC compliance study
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/doc_centre/ ... udy_en.pdf
• Non-Transposition and the Surinder Singh principle

Also relevant is Regulation 9 which covers the so-called Surinder Singh scenario of the national of a
Member State returning to their home state having worked or been self-employed in another Member
State and bringing with them (non-EEA) family members. There is a concern whether a
misapplication of the Surinder Singh principle is unjustly limiting the rights conferred by the
Directive.

The AIRE centre reports concerns over “[m]isapplication of the Surinder Singh principle to migrant
UK citizens (e.g., requiring the UK national to have worked or been self-employed elsewhere in the
EU, instead of simply being self-sufficient)â€

Obie
Moderator
Posts: 14657
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 12:06 am
Location: UK/Ireland
Ireland

Post by Obie » Thu Jun 02, 2011 9:35 pm

In the 2002 ECJ case of D'Hoop , the court did not hesitate to award freemovement rights to a Belgium student who had been rejected a tideover allowance on the basis that she undertook her secondary education in France. It is arguable that the principles in that case might apply to residency cases too.
Black life matters.

rachellynn1972
Member
Posts: 239
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 11:01 pm
Location: Aye
Contact:

Post by rachellynn1972 » Fri Jun 03, 2011 2:54 pm

Monifé wrote:
ImmigrationLawyer wrote:In my experience applications for residency based on marriage to an Irish national are currently taking 4- 6 months. Imho I think a "mega" applicaiton will just draw unnecesary (negative) attention to your case. I would lay low until the marriage and then apply in the normal way to INIS (Mariage to an Irish Nat Section). I don't want to criticise your lawyers but it might have been a better idea to apply as an Irish (not UK) citizen from the start.
Thanks for the advice. Spouse of Irish national application was not an option to us last year as we weren't ready for marriage, hence why we thought we could use the EU treaty rights defacto application, as the Irish defacto is subject to the immigration status/history of the applicant, which in my partners case is not good.

Why our solicitor suggested an application using a few different arguments, is that my partner had received a section 3 notification, which was put on hold pending our case. This is most definitely going to be reactivated, hence why our solicitor said we should make an application including the humanitarian leave to remain aspects and also on the basis of our partnership and soon to be marriage.



What better good are the two passports you hold, one is not better than the other, and a British or Irish passport is value as the same in the United Kingdom and Ireland. Surrender the Irish passport and remain a citizen of one eu country, after all other eu citizen benefit more than the local. Surrendering a passport will not cost more than £120 and rely on your new or old acquire citizenship and your partner can stay.
All eu passports have the same right in all eu states, an Irish and British passport have the same value in both island of Irish and British so what is the need for a dual citizenship as it cannot help.
I hold a French and British passport, I am waiting for their decision and if it goes against me I am ready to surrender their British passport to let my partner stay, to me it is of no good when I cant use eu law if I hold a British passport, I rather stay on my French and use the law after all I will still be considered as a permanent residence for my long stay equal as holding a British passport.
Under habitual residence test, a permanent residence and a holder of the country passport are considered the same, as if a British citizen leave the country for more than 2yrs he/she also lost the habitual residence so it make no difference, the other eu enjoy more than the local in terms of benefit from the government as they can always use eu law against the local state. The difference is that the local cannot be deported and even if you gain national they can take it off you and deport you, that is for people committing crime. As I can see you are not and I am not, moreover criminals are still allowed to stay under the Eu Human right Law.

walrusgumble
BANNED
Posts: 1279
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:30 am
Location: ireland

Post by walrusgumble » Fri Jun 03, 2011 4:45 pm

Obie wrote:In the 2002 ECJ case of D'Hoop , the court did not hesitate to award freemovement rights to a Belgium student who had been rejected a tideover allowance on the basis that she undertook her secondary education in France. It is arguable that the principles in that case might apply to residency cases too.
d'hoop is a confirmation of previous caselaw and regulations+directives that studying in another country is freemovement.eu relies on freedom of education.universities trive on attracting others nationals.article 7 is clear.british tribunals when interpreting chen accepted studying,even primary school.people in denmark who travel each day to work to sweden back n forth are exercising eu rights.what about free movement of services and right to avail of them,see carpeter v uk

walrusgumble
BANNED
Posts: 1279
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:30 am
Location: ireland

Post by walrusgumble » Fri Jun 03, 2011 5:01 pm

rachael, how does that get away from the fact that actual movement is required?ok chen the child was born in uk(ni) and never left uk but was deemed to have excercised eu rights on basis of irish citizens?will the states make an issue of the fact that someone like monife actually for most of her life recognised her irish citizenship n lived here?as for echr and eu law,neither courts give 100% guarantees that a national from one country can't be removed from another country due to criminal offences.uk regulary did and do remove non brits,especially non eu's whose family are british or others. of course you would want to be really bad as an eu to be kicked out of another eu state

rachellynn1972
Member
Posts: 239
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 11:01 pm
Location: Aye
Contact:

Post by rachellynn1972 » Fri Jun 03, 2011 8:02 pm

walrusgumble wrote:rachael, how does that get away from the fact that actual movement is required?ok chen the child was born in uk(ni) and never left uk but was deemed to have excercised eu rights on basis of irish citizens?will the states make an issue of the fact that someone like monife actually for most of her life recognised her irish citizenship n lived here?as for echr and eu law,neither courts give 100% guarantees that a national from one country can't be removed from another country due to criminal offences.uk regulary did and do remove non brits,especially non eu's whose family are british or others. of course you would want to be really bad as an eu to be kicked out of another eu state
For you to have a dual citizen, you must have somehow or somewhere your history have moved from one eu country or the other, you cannot just sit in one place if your family history have not move and get a dual citizen, you have moved someway or the other, maybe your father or your mother, the fact that we are now using eu treaty right those not stop your history movement. For instance: In 10yrs time from now, children of eu that are studying here in uk will have children and their children will have history of the mother’s or father’s movement even though they are born in uk they acquire dual citizen, then they have moved, this is a lesson for the future of our children to maintain our citizenship. In the case of dual citizen as in McCarthy, they said she is British, if she is no more British, then her history have move here to uk that is why she could acquire the Irish citizen then she is an Irish. The judgment was base on dual citizen, and then if you are no more a dual citizen, what will the law say? Will the law say the treaty right wills not recognized Monife single citizen of British if she is no more an Irish? I don’t think so, the eu law respect your wish to become any citizen you so willing to be and no human right law will say you cant surrender not to be a citizen of one eu country if you so wish. If monife surrender her Irish passport she is no more an Irish, then her single citizen will surely be recognized through the history of how she become a British citizen, maybe when her parents was exercising the treaty right in respect of when free movement started or not, then she has one way or the other moved even though she was born in Ireland, her family have one time move and exercise her treaty right. You can’t live in history of one country and acquire dual citizenship, you must have somehow or some way moved through your parents or others but (only Northern Ireland). An American holding a dual citizen of and American and British even though he/she has never visited or live in uk will be recognized as a British even if he was born in Ireland and hold only one eu citizen and another as an American making dual citizen of not dual citizen of eu countries. Then if that is recognized, a single eu citizen of British Monife will surely be recognized and she has also worked.

walrusgumble
BANNED
Posts: 1279
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:30 am
Location: ireland

Post by walrusgumble » Mon Jun 06, 2011 7:42 pm

rachellynn1972 wrote:
walrusgumble wrote:rachael, how does that get away from the fact that actual movement is required?ok chen the child was born in uk(ni) and never left uk but was deemed to have excercised eu rights on basis of irish citizens?will the states make an issue of the fact that someone like monife actually for most of her life recognised her irish citizenship n lived here?as for echr and eu law,neither courts give 100% guarantees that a national from one country can't be removed from another country due to criminal offences.uk regulary did and do remove non brits,especially non eu's whose family are british or others. of course you would want to be really bad as an eu to be kicked out of another eu state
For you to have a dual citizen, you must have somehow or somewhere your history have moved from one eu country or the other, you cannot just sit in one place if your family history have not move and get a dual citizen, you have moved someway or the other, maybe your father or your mother, the fact that we are now using eu treaty right those not stop your history movement. For instance: In 10yrs time from now, children of eu that are studying here in uk will have children and their children will have history of the mother’s or father’s movement even though they are born in uk they acquire dual citizen, then they have moved, this is a lesson for the future of our children to maintain our citizenship. In the case of dual citizen as in McCarthy, they said she is British, if she is no more British, then her history have move here to uk that is why she could acquire the Irish citizen then she is an Irish. The judgment was base on dual citizen, and then if you are no more a dual citizen, what will the law say? Will the law say the treaty right wills not recognized Monife single citizen of British if she is no more an Irish? I don’t think so, the eu law respect your wish to become any citizen you so willing to be and no human right law will say you cant surrender not to be a citizen of one eu country if you so wish. If monife surrender her Irish passport she is no more an Irish, then her single citizen will surely be recognized through the history of how she become a British citizen, maybe when her parents was exercising the treaty right in respect of when free movement started or not, then she has one way or the other moved even though she was born in Ireland, her family have one time move and exercise her treaty right. You can’t live in history of one country and acquire dual citizenship, you must have somehow or some way moved through your parents or others but (only Northern Ireland). An American holding a dual citizen of and American and British even though he/she has never visited or live in uk will be recognized as a British even if he was born in Ireland and hold only one eu citizen and another as an American making dual citizen of not dual citizen of eu countries. Then if that is recognized, a single eu citizen of British Monife will surely be recognized and she has also worked.
since when did american citizenship entitle you to Citizenship of the European Union? Wasn't there some sort of movement in the case of the mother or Mrs McCarthy? The individual has to exercise the right it is not passed on to generations? How about practicle suggestions as oppose to academic, we are the world suggestions? John F Kennedy's great grand parents were Irish born yet, bar the problem with not being allowed to take additional citizenship, Kennedy and his grandchildren are not entitlted to irish citizenshship - well honourary

lush
Junior Member
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue May 26, 2015 10:35 am

Re: Partners EU1 application refused on basis of dual citize

Post by lush » Mon Jun 01, 2015 7:32 am

Hello Monife,

I'd really appreciate if you can help with our situation.

I am a British citizen through naturalisation.
My wife lives in a country outside the EU and is applying to join me in the UK permanently.
I would like to know how the following background will affect her application.

BACKGROUND
My then girlfriend overstayed her visa for 5 years from 2002 - 2008
She left the UK voluntarily in 2008, over 7 years ago.
We got married in 2013

Whilst living in the UK
She visited GP a couple of times
She never had any surgery done by NHS


I've been a British citizen since 2006
we applied for a spouse visa in 2013. She was refused due to 320(11) and I didnt meet financial requirements
We appealed but judge dismissed only because I didnt meet the financial requirement in june 2013 (no)
She gave birth to our last year august. we applied for our daughter's british passport in Oct 2014 and we got in March 2014 (this delayed my wife's application)


We just applied for her visa last month (April 2015), While waiting for her visa to come thru. I always like to have a plan B, Just incase she gets denied again. I won't mind moving to Ireland just so i can be with my family.
Please can you flourish me with all the required information for me to be able to apply for EU Permit for my wife please.

Monifé
Senior Member
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 5:42 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Partners EU1 application refused on basis of dual citize

Post by Monifé » Tue Jun 02, 2015 3:01 pm

Hi Lush.

You cannot apply for an EEA family permit while living in the UK unless you hold another EU citizenship (and have lived and worked in that country).

I don't know anything about the British immigration rules so I can't help you there.

You could move to Ireland and apply for an EEA family permit based on your British citizenship but you will need to prove that you can financially support your family i.e. get a job or have a LOT of savings. It should be pretty straight forward to get visa approval to Ireland once you satisfy the conditions.

You can click here for further information.
beloved is the enemy of freedom, and deserves to be met head-on and stamped out - Pierre Berton

Locked
cron