- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, John, ChetanOjha, archigabe, CR001, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix, Administrator
It was good of you to post your experience (I know you've had trouble, but never with the airlines).mick5 wrote:No need to worry i traveled with Ryne air and easy jet no problem at all just to be on a safe side keep your marriage certificate country ur traveling they might ask but not airline no problem at all
All EU countries apply directive 2004/38/EC.DAMMYDAMMY wrote:FABY and all well wishers,thanks so much for your replies,i appreciate you all,pls does germany,belgium and holland operate a visa free also if am travelling with my eea wife? also is swistzerland part of eea country and do u know if they also operate visa free if am with my eea wife.thanks
One can travel to Swiss on a Schengen visa , IMO.EUsmileWEallsmile wrote:Switzerland is not a member of the EU and so the directive does not apply there. Freedom of movement does, however, and it is possible to get a free visa under similar arrangements.
A visa national is required to have a Schengen visa for Switzerland unless they hold a residence permit issued by a Schengen country (and that residence permit has been reported as 'Schengen-active' to Brussels but I believe most are). That's because Switzerland itself is a Schengen member and not an EEA member.newbieholland wrote:One can travel to Swiss on a Schengen visa , IMO.EUsmileWEallsmile wrote:Switzerland is not a member of the EU and so the directive does not apply there. Freedom of movement does, however, and it is possible to get a free visa under similar arrangements.
You can, but I don't think that was the question asked - sorry if this was not clear.newbieholland wrote:One can travel to Swiss on a Schengen visa , IMO.EUsmileWEallsmile wrote:Switzerland is not a member of the EU and so the directive does not apply there. Freedom of movement does, however, and it is possible to get a free visa under similar arrangements.
This is an instance where it would be better to start another thread in the EEA route forum. (The reason being it's nothing to do with your original thread and it would be better in the EEA route section).DAMMYDAMMY wrote:thanks every1,pls can u inform me about the expectation of HO from me n my wife when its time for me to get permanent resident/indefinate leave after the 5years residency expires,pls what are the dos and dont....... at present my wife is on CHB,TAX CRD,HOUS BENFT,pls what are the benefits that can affect me from now to d 5years lapse ?................all reply ll be valued. many thanks
Of the Swiss? They do not have a legal choice. They would need to amend their bilateral agreement with the EU. Problem of that is that the free movement agreement is part of a bundle of agreements. If one falls all fall (Guillotine clause). Also, a new popular vote would need to be held.EUsmileWEallsmile wrote:I agree it's rather silly of them.
This has nothing to do with the bilaterals or the "guillotine clause".sum1 wrote:Of the Swiss? They do not have a legal choice. They would need to amend their bilateral agreement with the EU. Problem of that is that the free movement agreement is part of a bundle of agreements. If one falls all fall (Guillotine clause). Also, a new popular vote would need to be held.EUsmileWEallsmile wrote:I agree it's rather silly of them.
How so without being in conflict with the Schengen rules or the bilaterals? Neither provides for visa-free travel as you say. How do you propose to break out of this corset? Does the Schengen agreement allow extensions beyond the original agreement (it would obviously not be a problem for the other Schengen members)? Could a change be legally challenged within CH, in other words would it be lawful?ca.funke wrote:It´s a bit difficult to understand, but once you do you see how stoopid this is, and it´s EXCLUSIVELY the Swiss authority´s fault. In order to bridge the gap, they could -as before Schengen- unilaterally accept "family members of EU-citizens who are usually visa-required in Schengen, but resident in above 5 countries"´s residence-permits, and everything would be back to making sense.
These changes would NOT be in conflict with the Schengen rules, or let´s say only indirectly, or at least it wouldn´t matter.sum1 wrote:How so without being in conflict with the Schengen rules or the bilaterals? Neither provides for visa-free travel as you say. How do you propose to break out of this corset? Does the Schengen agreement allow extensions beyond the original agreement (it would obviously not be a problem for the other Schengen members)? Could a change be legally challenged within CH, in other words would it be lawful?
And there lies the problem. You opine that CH can unlaterally make this change without actually arguing why. I am of the opinion that they can't because the Schengen agreement gave CH very clear rules how to operate their immigration. They cannot easily break out of this as mentioned earlier.ca.funke wrote:These changes would NOT be in conflict with the Schengen rules, or let´s say only indirectly, or at least it wouldn´t matter.sum1 wrote:How so without being in conflict with the Schengen rules or the bilaterals? Neither provides for visa-free travel as you say. How do you propose to break out of this corset? Does the Schengen agreement allow extensions beyond the original agreement (it would obviously not be a problem for the other Schengen members)? Could a change be legally challenged within CH, in other words would it be lawful?