New EU deal: Free-movement rights gone?

[chaoclive]

"The agreement confirms measures to deny free-movement rights to nationals of a country outside the EU who marry an EU national, as well as action to tackle the use of sham marriages to gain residence rights."

Does this mean that the EEA route is now, effectively, closed?

[secret.simon]

Don't worry. The ECJ/CJEU will throw it all out. The negotiations are worthless and blatantly in bad faith.

[silverpearlz]

The deal is not clear yet. This will probably be applied along with legislative change. Also may be after UK decides to stay in EU after referendum. I am not sure if these politicians decisions abide by law. Could be a political gimmick to make people think UK achieved something. But UK has to be in EU for business. It is turning in to a business deal and disrespecting people's freedom. This should be challenged by all people through petitions or something like that. Just my opinion. I am still not clear about what the exact regulation change will be.

[secret.simon]

BBC Radio 4 has a few programmes about the EU deal. The Week in Westminster is live now.

The World at One is also covering this topic today.

[Remawirah]

This is very disappointing news. Does anyone know approximately how long this would take to be applied to uk law?
Would this also affect people on residence cards about to apply for PR?
Thanks.

[alex1128]

Did anyone have access to this drafted deal yet ,?

[ryuzaki]

"In accordance with Union law, Member States are able to take action to prevent abuse of rights or fraud, such as the presentation of forged documents, and address cases of contracting or maintaining marriages of convenience with third country nationals for the purpose of making use of free movement as a route for regularising unlawful stay in a Member State or address cases of making use of free movement as a route for bypassing national immigration rules applying to third country nationals."

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meeti ... /02/18-19/

It looks like they want to shut it down. The only question now is what the timeline will be, and when the cut-off date is. Cameron is trying to rip our families apart.

[Obie]

The deal is not bad. Cameron has got the most he could have hoped for. I don't think a lot may change .

The deal will only come into effect if UK vote to stay in and the commission is informed of this.

[alphagear]

Wonder what the case will be with people who have already done the route and returned to uk.

I will be applying for eea2 in april after wife gives birth.

[noajthan]

"In accordance with Union law, Member States are able to take action to prevent abuse of rights or fraud, such as the presentation of forged documents, and address cases of contracting or maintaining marriages of convenience with third country nationals for the purpose of making use of free movement as a route for regularising unlawful stay in a Member State or address cases of making use of free movement as a route for bypassing national immigration rules applying to third country nationals."

Questions of abuse have always been a component of EU law.

See https://www.freemovement.org.uk/abuse-o ... der-singh/

[secret.simon]

Michael, Lord Forsyth made an absolutely valid point on the Week in Westminster that I had not thought of earlier.

This is not going to be just one referendum, but the first of several. The European Union Act 2011 provides for a referendum for each EU treaty change that provides for a transfer of power. There is a good chance that we will be seeing EU referendums on a regular basis now.

Mind you, our brethren across the Irish Sea and other EU countries such as Denmark have had that provision for quite a while now. So, it is not innovative, but it certainly is likely to be disruptive.

[Sincejune]

Hi.
What your opinions on the people who are still waiting for EUTR visas to issued by the embassies.

Do u thing they will never complete SS route even if they get the type c visas from now on ?

[ryuzaki]

Questions of abuse have always been a component of EU law.

See https://www.freemovement.org.uk/abuse-o ... der-singh/

It's the second part where they talk about people circumventing the home country's immigration laws. That's the main reason people go this route, and would seem to talk to pretty much everyone wanting an EEA visa for partners from outside the EU.

[Richard W]

There was a long thread at the start of the month on this topic, but it's effectively gone missing - by accident, not deliberately.

For the best analysis I can find - though the logic is not the best - see Professor Steve Peers' EU law blog. The actual text is at European Council conclusions - there's also an introductory web page. The relevant text is in Annex VII.

The killer provision, to be implemented in new legislation, is

The Commission intends to adopt a proposal to complement Directive 2004/38 on free movement of Union citizens in order to exclude, from the scope of free movement rights, third country nationals who had no prior lawful residence in a Member State before marrying a Union citizen or who marry a Union citizen only after the Union citizen has established residence in the host Member State. Accordingly, in such cases, the host Member State's immigration law will apply to the third country national. This proposal will be submitted after the above Decision has taken effect.

However, I don't have any hope that we can kill this proposal by voting to leave the EU. It has supporters, perhaps as misunderstood, in other members of the EU.

This will affect people who have already settled in the EU using a national route. For example, because my wife has not naturalised, I, a British citizen, won't automatically be able to take her with me if I go to work on the continent. My wife only arrived in Europe after we married. I don't see why, instead of the red text, they couldn't have been satisfied with "spouses who are third country nationals who have no current lawful residence in a member state". That was part of the British 2006 regulations. The legal change is going to need work anyway, unless they're saying that certain spouses can't enter under the directive, but their children can. This discrepancy would have some attractiveness for long-term Surinder Singhing in - get the step-children in via Surinder Singh, and their parent via the national law.

It is possible that the ECJ will modify the new directive so that purely national law will only apply to initial entry, or perhaps entry for settlement, and that subsequent movement around the EEA will be as before. However, Steve Peers expressed doubts as to the ECJ's commitment to justice over public interest considerations.

[Obie]

My personal and legal view is that people should not be over concern about these proposed changes.

David Cameron has got what he want and the referendum is well and truly in earnest .

British people will go to the polls on the 23rd.

I believe it will be business as usual on the 24th June.

[Richard W]

I believe it will be business as usual on the 24th June.

What about 24 June 2017?

[Obie]

I did not say 24 June 2017 , I said 24 June 2016 .


A day after the referendum.

[Casa]

Business as usual maybe...apart from these new conditions.

[mkhan2525]

It's likely to be business as usual for those that have already moved to the host member state and have applied for their Article 10 residence cards. That is if transitional arrangements are in place.

We will have to see what happens in the coming months.

[alex1128]

My personal and legal view is that people should not be over concern about these proposed changes.

David Cameron has got what he want and the referendum is well and truly in earnest .

British people will go to the polls on the 23rd.

I believe it will be business as usual on the 24th June.

You think those laws will not go into effect after the referendum?

[Richard W]

I did not say 24 June 2017 , I said 24 June 2016 .

A day after the referendum.

I understood. I am selfishly worrying about the longer term, where those already in the EU may find they have lost their right of free movement.

There's also the prospect of utter chaos if the loss of rights affects those who have already entered on the basis of having them, and they switch from being legal residents to illegal workers. I know that wasn't done with the families of British-Irish dual nationals, but in those cases the dual national could always have renounced British citizenship if it didn't cost him his job.

[secret.simon]

However, I don't have any hope that we can kill this proposal by voting to leave the EU. It has supporters, perhaps as misunderstood, in other members of the EU.

Richard W, did you mean to say that we can't kill this proposal by voting to remain in the EU? Logically, leaving will kill the whole freedom of movement idea, not just a minor detail.

EDIT: Further reflection and your latest post has helped clarify matters. What you fear (correct me if I am wrong) is that even if the UK were to leave the EU, freedom of movement within rEU will still be imperilled by these ideas which have arisen as a part of the UK-EU deal.

I believe it will be business as usual on the 24th June.

What about 24 June 2017?

I think what Richard W means to suggest is that events will overtake us and the EU in the coming year and that it is likely that freedom of movement will die a natural death whether or not we remain a part of the EU.

@Alex1128, I think Obie means they are that meaningless as to make no difference. And for once, I agree.

[Obie]

Well I don't think they are meaningless. Mr Cameron has most of what he wanted. He got his deal and I am happy for him.

I only have difficulty accepting that some of these proposed changes to secondary legislation will have effect on primary legislation like the treaty or the decision of the CJEU .

The CJEU has special status in the Treaty and it decision has special status in the European communities Act 1972 .

I wonder how in law this proposal can have the effect of overturning Metock, Jia.

So strange. I aspire to study it more . But so far I will not say I am overly worried.

I make no secret of my view on immigration.

I am a global minded person, who strongly believe that there we must be in a borderless world were people can move freely and join their families and live their lives happily.

I am not a dearly beloved, and I believe all human are equal.

I am of the view that most of this talk of immigration is centred around race and culture .

If a million aussie or Canadian or Kiwi were migrating to UK , we possibly will not be having this debate.

[Richard W]

British people will go to the polls on the 23rd.

I believe it will be business as usual on the 24th June.

You think those laws will not go into effect after the referendum?

The rules for decisions are unlikely to go into effect until Monday 27 June. This is when primary purpose will appear in EEA decisions under one clarification. The other clarification is most likely to have no immediate influence - it seems likely to defend the 'centre of life' requirement in Surinder Singh cases.

The massive loss of freedom of movement rights will require legislation, in particular, acceptance by the European Parliament. There may well be debate on it. It will take months, and then the Home Office will have to work out how to foul their transposition up and sneak further restrictions in. They could have fun working out the rules for young non-EEA children born to dual national British by descent couples in Germany who married before ever going to Europe.

[Richard W]

The CJEU has special status in the Treaty and it decision has special status in the European communities Act 1972 .

I wonder how in law this proposal can have the effect of overturning Metock, Jia.

Overturning Metock is simple in principle. Metock is based on the 'Citizens' Directive', Directive 2004/38/EC. That is legislation, and legislation can be changed.

Surinder Singh is different. It is based on the treaties, and these are not being changed. Surinder Singh says that any EU citizen can move, with his family, around the EU for work. There are probably more details, but as far as I am aware, it says nothing about entering the EU in the first place.