EEA Family Permit for short visits

This thread was posted by mistake in Europe Immigration when it should have been in EEA Route. Could someone with super-powers be so kind as to move it please?

In two separate hearings, two different immigration judges have expressed doubt over whether an EEA Family permit is the appropriate form of entry clearance for a family member of an EEA citizen exercising treaty rights elsewhere in the EU when they wish to make short visits together to the UK.

In anticipation of the same question at the next hearing I am looking for some conclusive written evidence. I have found this in Chapter 3, Para 1.2 of the European Casework Instructions http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitec ... dlaw/ecis/

Example 1 – the Indian wife of a French national travelling to the United Kingdom for a shopping trip while the French national stays behind in France would require a visa. If she were travelling with her husband, or to join her husband who had travelled ahead of her, she would require an EEA family permit.

But I am sure that somewhere I have read a statement from saying that the UK policy is to issue a free of charge Family Permit instead of recognising the visa free travel rights of family members holding residence cards issued by other EEA states.

I can't find that reference again. Can anyone suggest where I can find a clear statement?

Rolfus wrote:In two separate hearings, two different immigration judges have expressed doubt over whether an EEA Family permit is the appropriate form of entry clearance for a family member of an EEA citizen exercising treaty rights elsewhere in the EU when they wish to make short visits together to the UK.

They doubted it because they thought that a residence card of another member state allows visa free travel or because they thought that an EEA FP is not appropriate and an ordinary visit visa should be issued?

Rolfus wrote:But I am sure that somewhere I have read a statement from saying that the UK policy is to issue a free of charge Family Permit instead of recognising the visa free travel rights of family members holding residence cards issued by other EEA states.

For example here: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/ ... 051_en.pdf

They were questioning whether a normal visit visa should be used for short visits, and the EEA family permit only if a long term move is intended.They didn't actually pursue this line, because the family member in question wants to study or possibly work during the short visit, neither of which is allowed under a visit visa.

From which year(s) are these opinions? As far as I know that was how EEA FPs were handled in the past, i.e. issued only to those who wished to rellocated to the UK long-term. But for a while now it has been acknowledged that short term visits also allow the issuance of a FP. The EUN 2.1 offer a choice (last paragraph).

Not that it adds a lot, but I sent >>a complaint about exactly this matter<< to the Commission.

Since I never received a substantial answer, I just recently decided to take things up with the Ombudsman.

Timeline:

• January 29th 2008:
  • My complaint with the Commission was originally lodged.
• January 30th 2008:
  • I received the complaint-number (only) (SG/CDC/2008/A/1076)
• April 04th 2008:
  • I specified my original complaint in more detail. (Since I just got involved in the topic at that time I learnt some more facts which had to be added to the details)
• April 14th 2008:
  • I received a reply from the Commission, outlining that they want to pursue this issue further with the UK.
  • (This was the only-every substantial answer!)
• July 29th 2008:
  • I asked for an update, since there was no further communication from the Commission on this issue.
  • I believed that the issue is indeed followed up on.
• August 11th 2008:
  • I received a reply, stating a new complaint number - although I never lodged a new complaint but just wanted an update on this specific issue. (SG/CDC/2008/A/6111 - this number is obviously of no relevance whatsoever!)
  • No other substantial reply.
• September 17th 2008:
  • I´m sending another reminder that this issue is pending, outlining that my wife and me want to travel to the UK shortly, and are still -illegally- hindered in freely and lawfully doing so.
  • No reply at all
• At this stage, I have to admit, I gave up for a while.
  • I never received any further substantial feedback.
• March 28th 2011, thus about 3 years after the initial complaint!
  • Asking the Commission for another update (admittedly triggered because we would -again- like to travel to the UK soon)
  • no reply by the Commission whatsoever.
• April 12th 2011:
  • Lodging a complaint with the Ombudsman, stating that the EU is not "doing everything in its power to alleviate the problem".
  • This case deals with serious breaches of the freedom of movement, which is one of the most fundamental rights that constitute the European Union.
  • I sent a very detailed complaint, outlining exactly what is, in my opinion, illegal behaviour by a memberstate, here the UK.
  • The Commission acknowledges that, indeed, it thinks that the right of free movement is -illegally- withheld from my wife and me. They assure me that the matter will be followed up on.
  • Although I asked for updates on the matter 3 (three) times, I simply received no reply from the Commission whatsoever.
  • The freedom of movement continues to be illegally withheld from my wife and me by the United Kingdom for, by now, 3 (three) years without any further communication by the Commission.

Let´s see if there´ll be a substantial reply.

If anyone wants to see the original letters received, I´ll scan them. (This would be some work, so I´ll only do this if interest is expressed...)

Dear 86ti,
The first time was November 2010, the second was this Tuesday.
I think EUN2.1 is exactly what is needed if it is raised again. Thank you!

Dear ca.funke,
Very interesting. I agree with you, but the British Government doesn't read the EU directive in the same way. Your issue will only be settled by a case being referred to the ECJ.

Rolfus wrote:The first time was November 2010, the second was this Tuesday.

Interesting. And there I thought this was already a settled case.

Rolfus wrote:I think EUN2.1 is exactly what is needed if it is raised again.

But this web page was apparently last updated on 23 March 2009...

86ti wrote:From which year(s) are these opinions? As far as I know that was how EEA FPs were handled in the past, i.e. issued only to those who wished to rellocated to the UK long-term. But for a while now it has been acknowledged that short term visits also allow the issuance of a FP. The EUN 2.1 offer a choice (last paragraph).

I have always understood that the EEA FP was the visa to get if you are the family member of an EU citizen and want to travel to the UK. For both short visits (a wild weekend in London) and for moving forever.

I have never seen a UKBA suggestion that any other visa is relevant or appropriate, so long as the non-EU family member is traveling with or joining the EU citizen in the UK.

Rolfus wrote:But I am sure that somewhere I have read a statement from saying that the UK policy is to issue a free of charge Family Permit instead of recognising the visa free travel rights of family members holding residence cards issued by other EEA states.

I can't find that reference again. Can anyone suggest where I can find a clear statement?

The UK has used the slightly sloppy wording of the Directive (at least in English) to make it policy that the only people who do not need visas are those with UK issued Residence Cards.

And since they can require the EEA FP from whoever they decide (except those with "Residence Cards"), they then do it.

So I doubt you will find such a statement explicitly made.

I think I must have read it in an analysis of compliance with the Directive. I still can't find it, but I have enough to answer the point at the next hearing! Thanks to all.

ca.funke I have the same problem.

I am a British citizen with a Tunisian husband living in France. We were going to visit family at Christmas, got through passport control, boarding gate and everything and were just about to get on the bus to get on the plane when my husband was pulled aside and as usual treated like a dog and told he needed a visa. He has a French residence card and we took the marriage certificate etc just in case.
They would not let him get on the plane. Head of security at the airport said he needed a visa, they called UK who said he needed a visa and they called Birmingham airport to see if they would make an exception and all said no way without a visa despite the LAW clearly stating that he does not need a visa.

The EU as usual are not interested in any of their member states upholding the laws they make, it is farcical.

Hi skele,

did you also carry a printout of the UK´s own >>EEA-family-permit rules<<, published by the homeoffice itself?

Before an Immigration Officer refuses admission to a non-EEA national under
Regulation 11(2) because s/he does not produce an EEA family permit, the IO must
give the non-EEA national reasonable opportunity to provide by other means proof
that he/she is a family member of an EEA national with a right to accompany that
national or join him/her in the UK.

We´re planning to go to the UK soon, and I guess we have a joker: My wife is now (also) Belgian, but her Swiss residence-card still sais "Lebanese". As such we´ll try to pass all checkpoints as she being Lebanese, however should we get seriously stuck we´ll produce her Belgian ID, which should break us free...

...after this happend (not before some weekend in June or August) I´ll report back here.

Hi Directive,
Hi Rolfus,

I´m trying to understand your discussion but not getting anywhere, may I ask a really silly question?

Directive/2004/38/EC wrote:

Rolfus wrote:But I am sure that somewhere I have read a statement from saying that the UK policy is to issue a free of charge Family Permit instead of recognising the visa free travel rights of family members holding residence cards issued by other EEA states.

I can't find that reference again. Can anyone suggest where I can find a clear statement?

The UK has used the slightly sloppy wording of the Directive (at least in English) to make it policy that the only people who do not need visas are those with UK issued Residence Cards.

And since they can require the EEA FP from whoever they decide (except those with "Residence Cards"), they then do it.

So I doubt you will find such a statement explicitly made.

Rolfus: The UK issues EEA-FPs, not recognising other family-permits.

Directive: The UK only accepts UK-issued cards, asking EEA-FPs from everyone else.

How´s that different from each other, except you use different approaches to talk about the same?

Sorry if this is just a lack of understanding from my side

See also KA (EEA: family permit; admission) Sudan [2008] UKAIT 00052 (25 June 2008).

vinny wrote:See also KA (EEA: family permit; admission) Sudan [2008] UKAIT 00052 (25 June 2008).

As I read this case it is mainly about the question of prior residence in another member state which I think was obsoleted by the Metock case.

I was thinking about its reference to 11(4).

Rolfus wrote:I think I must have read it in an analysis of compliance with the Directive. I still can't find it, but I have enough to answer the point at the next hearing! Thanks to all.

This thread was posted by mistake in Europe Immigration when it should have been in EEA Route. Could someone with super-powers be so kind as to move it please?

Rolfus,
Do you mean these UK compliance study and transposition table from 2008

http://ec.europa.eu/justice/doc_centre/ ... udy_en.pdf

http://ec.europa.eu/justice/doc_centre/ ... nce_en.pdf

It seems the EU Commission are unwilling anymore to address
the UK violations.
And we can see a shift also on the EU Commission own rights website

The British Home Office policy has been to find loop holes in the
legislation, or show complete contempt instead of embracing and
honoring the rights of all Union Citizens (including own nationals) and
their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the
Member States.

Dear Acme4242,

Yes you have found it! I was thinking of the table of correspondence Art 5.2.
Citation of the Article:

2. Family members who are not nationals of a Member State shall only be required to have an entry visa in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 or, where appropriate, with national law.
For the purposes of this Directive, possession of the valid residence card referred to in Article 10 shall exempt such family members from the visa requirement.

National Provision:
(2) A person who is not an EEA national must be admitted to the United Kingdom if he is a family member of an EEA national, a family member who has retained the right of residence or a person with a permanent right of residence under regulation 15 and produces on arrival –
(a) a valid passport; and
(b) an EEA family permit, a residence card or a permanent residence card

Of course the UK interprets the Directive's reference to a 'residence card' as meaning a residence card issued by the UK itself only.

For what it is worth there is a huge gap in this table. It does not remark that the UK legislation defines 'EEA State' as excluding the UK. This then allows the UK to deny any of the rights of the Citizens Directive to UK nationals with treaty rights except as provided for in Regulation 9.

Dear ca-funke,

After making the above post, I looked again at the complaint you referred us to above:

This complaint (SG/CDC/2008/A/1076) deals with the fact that the UK may not be visited with a "residence-card for a family-member of an EU-citizen" (as per Article 5(2) of 2004/38/EC), as the UK -illegally- interprets this rule to be applicable for UK-issued residence cards (only).

It occurs to me that there is a category of third country nationals who hold a "residence-card for a family-member of an EU-citizen" (or even permanent residence) to whom the UK denies entry on the basis of their residence card and to whom they also refuse to give an EEA Family Permit. These are extended family members of British citizens with treaty rights.

rolfus wrote:

2. Family members who are not nationals of a Member State shall only be required to have an entry visa in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 or, where appropriate, with national law.
For the purposes of this Directive, possession of the valid residence card referred to in Article 10 shall exempt such family members from the visa requirement.

National Provision:
(2) A person who is not an EEA national must be admitted to the United Kingdom if he is a family member of an EEA national, a family member who has retained the right of residence or a person with a permanent right of residence under regulation 15 and produces on arrival –
(a) a valid passport; and
(b) an EEA family permit, a residence card or a permanent residence card

Exactly what I´m quoting in my >>complaint<<!

What is your hearing about? Is your case about to be refered to the ECJ?

Rolfus wrote:(...)These are extended family members of British citizens with treaty rights.

To put in in Directive´s words, >>this is a murky area<<.

Actually, it´s a murky area I´d love to understand (scroll to top of linked thread)

I have put quite a lot about my personal case onto this thread. http://www.immigrationboards.com/viewto ... highlight=
Basically, I am trying to get an EEA Family Permit for my unmarried partner. I am British and I am exercising treaty rights in the Czech Republic.

Hi Rolfus,

wow, just went through most of "your" thread.

Wishing you all the best - do you have any dates for your hearings yet?

Rgds, Christian

We had a hearing at the UIT last week where arguments were heard as to whether the HO should be allowed to appeal. If the SIJ rules the appeal should go ahead there will be a substantive hearing. I have no idea when that will be.

I have been reading Metock again http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/2008/C12708.html and found this:

52. In particular, the first subparagraph of Article 5(2) of Directive 2004/38 provides that nationals of non-member countries who are family members of a Union citizen are required to have an entry visa, unless they are in possession of the valid residence card referred to in Article 10 of that directive. In that, as follows from Articles 9(1) and 10(1) of Directive 2004/38, the residence card is the document that evidences the right of residence for more than three months in a Member State of the family members of a Union citizen who are not nationals of a Member State, the fact that Article 5(2) provides for the entry into the host Member State of family members of a Union citizen who do not have a residence card shows that Directive 2004/38 is capable of applying also to family members who were not already lawfully resident in another Member State.

This conclusion (in bold) is fundamental to the Metock judgement. It is also totally incompatible with the British interpretation that the residence card referred to in Article 10 is a residence card issued by themselves.