- 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
Could you give the name of the case and the court that decided it (presumably the ECJ, but always best to spell it out)?
I think I have located the case you refer to (R. H. Kempf v Staatssecretaris van Justitie). Note that in that case, the Netherlands authorities accepted the applicant was a "genuine and effective" worker, but argued that the fact that he supplemented his income from benefits meant that he did not qualify as exercising treaty rights.
I thought you were the googling expert! Following my leads, I also found the case.secret.simon wrote: ↑Sun Jul 29, 2018 5:52 pmCould you give the name of the case and the court that decided it (presumably the ECJ, but always best to spell it out)?
I believe that is the wrong way of looking at the guidance. The guidance is that if the earnings exceed that threshold, then the person should be accepted as a worker. Otherwise, the case worker must assess whether the work is “genuine and effective” rather than “purely marginal and ancillary”.In the UK, the EEA citizen spouse is expected to earn more than the threshold for paying Class 1 National Insurance contributions, currently £162 per week. Your EEA citizen spouse would be earning more than that if she works more than 24 hours a week, so you should be fine.