- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix, John, ChetanOjha, archigabe
If you are exercising treaty rights at the time of your partners residence application then there should be no problem.shanade wrote:Also if you are exercising treaty rights at the time of the application, does it matter if you have been on benefits long term beforehand on medical grounds?
86ti wrote:I might have missed it but where did the OP say so?
I might have misinterpretted her. Just read the above line and panicked.shanade wrote:Whilst the McCarthy case has been refused
Obie wrote:It appears that the advocate general bow to the pressure of the UK, Ireland and Denmark. This opinion does not look good at all. Although some aspect of it might be helpful to people who have lived in the Uk lawfully, and subsequently married an EEA national
avjones wrote:Where a Union citizen is a national of two Member States of the European Union but has always lived in only one of those two States, she cannot claim a right of residence under Directive 2004/38/EC in that State.
Thanks for your advice Obie. Much appreciated.Obie wrote:Advocate General Kokott's and Sharpton's opinions are contradictory of each other.
The later formed an opinion based on the consequence of not addressing the issue of reverse discrimination, whiles the former formed an opinion based on the status quo.
One does not know whose opinion will be adopted by the judges in there opinion. Even Advocate general Kokott is not sure which direcetion the court will follow, which is why he proposed for the court to allow further submissions should the court wishes to go advocate Sharpton's direction.
The advocate general appears to be in a state of confusion. We will just have to wait till next spring when the rulings would have been delivered.
In your case Monife, the Irish authorities have issued you with a Permanent resident certificate, they cannot simply revoke it, when you have not been away for 2 years. Also you did not obtain it fraudulently, Besides the advocate general did not in actual fact preclude people in your situation from choosing their nationality, but it should not be purely for artificial purpose. The facts of that case are different from that of yours.
Mrs McCarthy is in her 50's , has never chosen to pick up her Irish citizenship, until she was in her mid to late 40's. In this case it doesn look real, as pointed out by advocate general in his opinion. Therefore an assessment will have to be done on the individual cases. This is stated in Paragraph 33 of his opinion.
I believe you are much younger than her, so you can say when you came of age you identified with you British Heritage than Irish. That might be perfectly acceptable. Also the important issue is, they cannot withdraw your PRC.
You lawyer should argue that this is just an opinion, that Advocate general Kokoot did not propose that people in your case cannot choose to adopt another nationality,however it has to be real, and an assessment will have to be undertaken to ascertain the circumstance, which the Irish have done and issued you with a Permanent Resident Certificate, which is valid.
Your age and personal and economic circumstances are different from that of Mrs McCarthy. That there is a contradiction between the opinions of Advocate Sharpton anf Kokoot, therefore these opinion cannot be conclusive. In any event the decision of the Irish to issue with PRC is legally binding on them and cannot be withdrawn retrospectively, as this will be proportionate, against the principle of community law.