Updated 'Surinder Singh' guidance (as of 25 October 2017)

[UKBALoveStory]

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... 3.0EXT.pdf

For all those applying under 'Surinder Singh' route

[JulietSoul]

Thank you very much.
This is very interesting. It basically waives the CSI requirement and the requirement for the BC to be a qualified person before 25.11.16 if I am reading this correctly?
Very good they are putting forward transitional arrangements. Would love to see a detailed legal analysis of this, hope the Free Movement blog does it.

[greatscott]

Thank you very much.
This is very interesting. It basically waives the CSI requirement and the requirement for the BC to be a qualified person before 25.11.16 if I am reading this correctly?
Very good they are putting forward transitional arrangements. Would love to see a detailed legal analysis of this, hope the Free Movement blog does it.

To be honest I am so sick of these people. My wife was told to leave the office today in a vicious move, the charity where she works not even bothering to consult Home Office about her right to work. (https://www.gov.uk/check-job-applicant-right-to-work).

We are now all without work, and I have had to sign up for the dole today to prevent a crisis as my struggling business cannot continue without my wife's salary to supplement our income.

Our appeal is waiting the tribunal date, yet with these new rules (still illegal I might add) we would have been approved as I only have under these new rules 6 weeks to prove QP, and can prove in those 6 weeks that I was self employed, registered with HMRC.

Classy bunch..................................................................................................

Should we reapply for EEA(PR) while waiting for our Appeal to be heard?

[Obie]

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... 3.0EXT.pdf

For all those applying under 'Surinder Singh' route

The guidance, just like the regulation 9 is unlawful. It makes no difference.

You cannot say Eind is a good law, and then pick and choose what you like about eind, or say O B overturns Eind, which is what the Home Office was saying.

Firstly the question asked in O &B was different to the question in Eind, therefore even if O and B says something that is inconsistent with Eind, i will say it is obiter as the issue in Eind was clearly not dealt with in O & B, and no reasonable tribunal will say so.