Doing a Surinder Singh and still abroad? - read this

If you are in the process of a Surinder Singh route and still abroad, I suggest you read this post about changes in the regulations that intend to make it harder to do a "quick & dirty" Surinder Singh route. You might wish to apply for a EEA Family Permit now to benefit from the transitional arrangements which will be in place for people who applied before the changes come into effect (January 2014).

Jambo wrote:If you are in the process of a Surinder Singh route and still abroad, I suggest you read this post about changes in the regulations that intend to make it harder to do a "quick & dirty" Surinder Singh route. You might wish to apply for a EEA Family Permit now to benefit from the transitional arrangements which will be in place for people who applied before the changes come into effect (January 2014).

Will the new rules affect residence card permit application once you're in the UK ie family permit application covered under old rules and rc under new ones?

We just applied for the family permit this week to return for Christmas

Thanks

Can you briefly outline the changes taking place?

I believe that potential Surinder Singh beneficiaries who will be applying after Christmas should seek legal advice.

In the next few weeks, most of the advice on this forum, could not longer be valid, as their right has cease to be an absolute and automatic, and become a qualified right.

At last! I've been predicting this for years!

I will advise people not to get too worried though.

The 1972 act has precedence over the EEA Regulations.

It permits the court to ignore the EEA regulations and implement the directive, where the regulations conflict with the caselaw and the directive.

So the court will be bound by law to ignore these changes, notwithstanding the fact that UKBA official may not.

These changes are not worth the piece of paper they are written on.

Your predictions may be correct in regards to the immigration rules, but not in regards to the regulations, unless UK leaves the EU.

Obie wrote:I will advise people not to get too worried though.

The 1972 act has precedence over the EEA Regulations.

It permits the court to ignore the EEA regulations and implement the directive, where the regulations conflict with the caselaw and the directive.

So the court will be bound by law to ignore these changes, notwithstanding the fact that UKBA official may not.

These changes are not worth the piece of paper they are written on.

Your predictions may be correct in regards to the immigration rules, but not in regards to the regulations, unless UK leaves the EU.

Whats the 1972 Act Obie? UK only joined EU (or Common Market as we called it then) in 1973.

I think the SS route is valid, indeed what I working in Germany I considered using it, but went UK rules instead. But I do feel the hopping there and hopping back is/was an/a deliberate attempt to breach UK immigration rules, and thereby I've always felt it should be blocked.

However, it's hard to prove intent, so it was a fair exploitation of the rules in place, and on the other hand you can't blame the authorities for blocking it. Surprised it took so long, maybe not that many avail themselves of it so wasn't a priority?

Personally having experienced life in Germany, I want to go back! So it does surprise me people go there and come back here!

The 1972 act is what enabled the UK to Join the European Union.

In provides that EU instruments like judgements of the court of Justice, be used by the court as evidence.

The court ruled in Akrich, that provided the EU citizens has undertaken genuine and effective work, the motive for her going to another memberstate is irrelevant.

By imposing these rules, it will appear, that the UK government is adding more than the requirement, which is that the person has undertaken genuine an effective work. There is no requirement that they have resided for a period of time, or their level of integration in another state. So long as they undertook genuine and effective work, and are recognised by the other memberstate as worker, that is all that matters.

One of the problems in 2004/38 is theres a few "subject to national legislations" in it. For example Durable relationship is open to be interpreted via national legislation so they can say must be 2 years or even must have been living together for 2 years or whatever gov want to raise the barriers to.
The word attested has many meanings from a letter from family saying its so or if gov decide they want reams of official documents.

These new changes are going to need some pretty heavy legal challenges and many people will just give up. They are a restriction to free movement and right to family life.

Wanderer wrote:

Obie wrote:I will advise people not to get too worried though.

The 1972 act has precedence over the EEA Regulations.

It permits the court to ignore the EEA regulations and implement the directive, where the regulations conflict with the caselaw and the directive.

So the court will be bound by law to ignore these changes, notwithstanding the fact that UKBA official may not.

These changes are not worth the piece of paper they are written on.

Your predictions may be correct in regards to the immigration rules, but not in regards to the regulations, unless UK leaves the EU.

Whats the 1972 Act Obie? UK only joined EU (or Common Market as we called it then) in 1973.

I think the SS route is valid, indeed what I working in Germany I considered using it, but went UK rules instead. But I do feel the hopping there and hopping back is/was an/a deliberate attempt to breach UK immigration rules, and thereby I've always felt it should be blocked.

However, it's hard to prove intent, so it was a fair exploitation of the rules in place, and on the other hand you can't blame the authorities for blocking it. Surprised it took so long, maybe not that many avail themselves of it so wasn't a priority?

Personally having experienced life in Germany, I want to go back! So it does surprise me people go there and come back here!

well UK immigration rules are unfair forcing people to use SS. I hope the people going through the hell will agree with me.

jinkazama_11 wrote:

Wanderer wrote:

Obie wrote:I will advise people not to get too worried though.

The 1972 act has precedence over the EEA Regulations.

It permits the court to ignore the EEA regulations and implement the directive, where the regulations conflict with the caselaw and the directive.

So the court will be bound by law to ignore these changes, notwithstanding the fact that UKBA official may not.

These changes are not worth the piece of paper they are written on.

Your predictions may be correct in regards to the immigration rules, but not in regards to the regulations, unless UK leaves the EU.

Whats the 1972 Act Obie? UK only joined EU (or Common Market as we called it then) in 1973.

I think the SS route is valid, indeed what I working in Germany I considered using it, but went UK rules instead. But I do feel the hopping there and hopping back is/was an/a deliberate attempt to breach UK immigration rules, and thereby I've always felt it should be blocked.

However, it's hard to prove intent, so it was a fair exploitation of the rules in place, and on the other hand you can't blame the authorities for blocking it. Surprised it took so long, maybe not that many avail themselves of it so wasn't a priority?

Personally having experienced life in Germany, I want to go back! So it does surprise me people go there and come back here!

well UK immigration rules are unfair forcing people to use SS. I hope the people going through the hell will agree with me.

Oh really? Unfair how?

Oh yes.
you said you considered using it when you were working in Germany.
Why you considered using it?