legal basis for 'travel to or with'

[86ti]

I am trying to find the legal basis for the 'travel to or with' condition for visa free travel for the non-EEA family member based on the Directive 2004/38/EC but seem unable to find it. Any suggestions?

[John]

Having just looked at the Directive, I think you should refer to the first part of Article 3 (my emphasis) :-

1. This Directive shall apply to all Union citizens who move to or reside in a Member State other than that of which they are a national, and to their family members as defined in point 2 of Article 2 who accompany or join them.

[86ti]

Having just looked at the Directive, I think you should refer to the first part of Article 3 (my emphasis) :-

1. This Directive shall apply to all Union citizens who move to or reside in a Member State other than that of which they are a national, and to their family members as defined in point 2 of Article 2 who accompany or join them.

Thanks John. In another thread I have been pointed to Article 6(2).

Article 3 seems to exclude a countries own nationals which may explain why the Germans thought they could do so (it's still on their UK Embassy webpage despite some report here that they removed this exception recently). But Article 6 doesn't.

[86ti]

Oh, and one more thing. The Directive does not explicitly say that the 'EEA national' must be the sponsor (but I suppose that is how it needs to be understood). In other words can the non-EEA mother of her EEA child travel visa free without the EEA partner/sponsor but with the child alone?

[Ben]

..can the non-EEA mother of her EEA child travel visa free without the EEA partner/sponsor but with the child alone?

If the EEA child is exercising a treaty right then yes, if the non-EU mother is in possession of a Residence Card issued in accordance with Directive 2004/38/EC.

If the EEA child is not exercising a treaty right, Chen conditions may apply (non-EU mother may not be permitted to work).

[Richard66]

Which is the definition of a treaty right? I notice the relevant legislation speaks not of people "exercising treaty rights" but of being "qualified" or not. Surely the very fact an EEA citizen may go to another EEA country without undue formality and live there for up to three months is in itself a treaty right? At one time one spoke of "provider or receiver of services". I have not seen this catchphrase recently, but the very fact you buy a bus ticket or a sandwich in another EEA state constitutes receiving a service?

[Richard66]

In other words can the non-EEA mother of her EEA child travel visa free without the EEA partner/sponsor but with the child alone?

I would say no, because the non-EEA mother's right of free movement is derives from her husband's being an EEA citizen. The child's right of free movement, consequently, derives from his father and not from his mother. In practice such a situation would cause a lot of talk, as the little baby (let us imagine the child to be one) will be able to travel feely but his mother not.

[charles4u]

Well my own view, I dont think the child would be able to travel alone cus its right its derived from either of the parents that legally a residence being residence permit or citizen and one of them must accompany the child.

The fact that even a spouse with a residence card or family residence card cant even travel alone or face alot of difficulties at port of entry then in a case of a child it will be more complicated..but I wanna know the kinda child age here ..18-20 or what? cus this ages can get a passport and can easily go alone or maybe even with an ID within the EU and if born in the EU then automatically a citizen I guess so whats the stress.