There are upcoming cases in the CJEU. It will be interesting to see what the CJEU says, in circumstances, where the family member has not moved to another memberstate. As far as things in the UK are concerned, the Court of Appeal ruled in GC China, that the family member is required to have moved with the Union Citizen.
The extent to which metock affect this preposition is yet to be seen.
The Directive applies to UK national. Regulation 9 by law is required to incoperate the priciples established in the ECJ. That a memberstate own nationals has similar rights in their home country as if they are in another memberstates, in certain circumstance.
The ECJ stated that they have rights under the treaty. The directive is a secondary legislative provision, that gives right to primary right under the treaty, which a memberstates own national acquire in certain circumstances.
The ECJ in
Morson and jhanjan did not seem concerned about the fact that the parents had not moved, all they were concerned about was the fact that the Dutch Son and daughter had not moved.
The the Son and daughter or Mrs Morson and Mrs Jhanjan had moved, the outcome might have been different, notwithstanding the fact that the parent had not moved with them.