Tag Archives: surinder-singh

SURINDER SINGH ROUTE STEP BY STEP

Surinder Singh Route Step by Step Guides

If you are looking for a Surinder Singh Route Step by Step then you have came to the right place.    The Surinder Singh Route Step by Step guides on this website are minimal information  guide.  These are what you would normally do to meet the requirements of the EU Route Visa.

So – In short – What’s the process?

Surinder Singh Route Step by Step
Simple Surinder Singh Route Step by Step Flowchart

Where do I Find these Step by Step Guides?

There are a number of Step by Step guides on this website.  There is a Step by Step guide for starting a self employed business in Ireland.  Additionally, the Republic of Ireland has it’s own Surinder Singh Step by Step guide. Detailing things from Applying for an entry visa to Registering for your GP.

The Surinder Singh Ireland Step by Step Guide

You can find the Surinder Singh Ireland Step by Step guide here: The Republic of Ireland.  Within the step by step guide there are links which direct you to more detailed information on the Surinder Singh process.

Calling For Contact from Singhers / Separated Families

Further to Don McVey’s short documentary (The Price of Love), which was released earlier in the month, Benjamin Cowles is currently looking to create a similar project.

Benjamin is a MA Journalism student. The MA is Journalism, War and International Human Rights. His film is still in the very early stages at the moment. It is going to focus on the UK Immigration Regulations for Britons with non-EEA partners and the Human Rights violations that these incur.

Benjamin states that he is a firm believer in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which the UK is a signatory. In which Article 16 states that men and women have the right to marry and found a family. The same sentiment is echoed in the European Convention of Human Rights and the Human Rights Act 1998.

The UK government claims to uphold human rights, yet – as many of us know – this is only when it suits them. The documentary is to focus on this right to marry people from beyond European borders. Another reason Benjamin want to cover this topic is that it also affects him…

I was shocked to learn that I couldn’t exercise the basic human right to live with her [my girlfriend] in the country I grew up in.

The film won’t only be focusing on the SS route [Surinder Singh Route], but also on the plight of other couples, especially LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender] couples who have far more pressure to deal with.

If you’d like to be involved or if have any more questions you can contact Benjamin who will be more than interested to hear your story.

Benjamin can be emailed on cowlesz [at] hotmail [dot] co [dot] uk

Case C-456/12 – O and B Judgment of the ECJ

The official press release in relation to the judgment of the ECJ for Case C-456/12 reads as follows:

Directive 2004/38/EC grants EU citizens and their family members the right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States

1. In that regard, the Raad van State (Netherlands, Council of State) has made two separate requests to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling in the context of four cases concerning the refusal of Netherlands’ authorities to grant a right of residence to a third-country national who is a family member of an EU citizen of Netherlands nationality.

Case C-456/12: Mr O. and Mr B.’s situation

Case C-456/12 concerns the refusal to grant a right of residence where the EU citizen returns to the Member State of which he is a national after short periods of residence in another Member State with the family member in question.

In 2006, Mr O., a Nigerian national, married a Netherlands national and from 2007 to April 2010 he lived in Spain. During that period, Mr O.’s wife resided for two months with her husband in Spain and regularly spent time with Mr O. in the form of holidays in Spain.

Mr B., a Moroccan national, lived from December 2002 with his partner who has Netherlands nationality. In 2005, Mr B. moved to Belgium and lived in an apartment rented by his partner. His partner resided with Mr B. in Belgium every weekend. In April 2007, Mr B. returned to Morocco and in July 2007 Mr B. married the Netherlands national in question.

As Mr O. and Mr B. were family members of EU citizens, the referring court asks whether EU law, in particular Article 21 TFEU and Directive 2004/38, grants such third-country nationals a right of residence in the Member State of which the citizens in question are nationals.

The Court points out first of all that Article 21 TFEU and Directive 2004/38 do not confer any autonomous right on third-country nationals. Any rights conferred on third-country nationals are rights derived from the exercise of freedom of movement by an EU citizen.

The Court finds next that Directive 2004/38 does not confer any derived right of residence on third-country nationals who are family members of an EU citizen residing in the Member State of which he is a national. Directive 2004/38 applies only where a citizen moves or resides in a Member State other than that of which he is a national.

With regard to the question as to whether Article 21 TFEU grants such a derived right of residence, the Court explains that a refusal to allow a derived right of residence for a family member of an EU citizen who is a third-country national, may interfere with the EU citizen’s freedom of movement under that provision. An EU citizen may be discouraged from leaving his Member State of origin because he is uncertain whether he will be able to continue, on returning to that Member State, a family life which he will have created or strengthened in another Member State. However, such an obstacle will arise only where the residence in the host Member State has been genuine, that is to say where it satisfies the requirements of Directive 2004/38 relating to a right of residence for a period of longer than three months.

It follows that, where an EU citizen has, pursuant to and in conformity with the provisions of Directive 2004/38 relating to a right of residence for a period of longer than three months, genuinely resided in another Member State and, during that genuine residence, a family life has been created and strengthened in that Member State, the effectiveness of Article 21 TFEU requires that the citizen’s family life in the host Member State may continue on returning to his Member State of origin. That implies that, in such a case, a derived right of residence is allowed for the family member who is a third-country national.

The conditions for granting such a derived right of residence, based on Article 21 TFEU should not, in principle, be more strict than those provided for by Directive 2004/38 for the grant of a derived right of residence to a third-country national who is a family member of an EU citizen where that citizen has exercised his right of freedom of movement by becoming established in a Member State other than the Member State of which he is a national. Even though Directive 2004/38 does not cover the return of the EU citizen to the Member State of which he is a national, it should be applied by analogy given that in both cases it is the EU citizen who is the reference point for the grant of a derived right of residence to a third-country national who is a member of his family.

As regards the question whether the cumulative effect of various short periods of residence in the host Member State may create a derived right of residence for a family member of an EU citizen who is a third-country national on the citizen’s return to his Member State of origin, the Court points out that only a period of residence satisfying the conditions of Directive 2004/38 relating to a right of residence for a period of longer than three months will give rise to such a right of residence. The Court notes that, even when considered together, short periods of residence (such as weekends or holidays spent in a Member State other than that of which the citizen is a national) do not satisfy those conditions.

The court notes in addition that Mr B. acquired the status of family member of an EU citizen after his partner’s residence in the host Member State. A third-country national, who has not had, at least during part of his residence in the host Member State, the status of family member of an EU citizen, is not entitled to a derived right of residence in that Member State pursuant to Directive 2004/38. Accordingly, that third-country national is also unable to rely on Article 21 TFEU for the grant of a derived right of residence on the return of the EU citizen to the Member State of which he is a national.

In the light of all the foregoing, the Court rules that where an EU citizen has, pursuant to and in conformity with the provisions of Directive 2004/38 relating to a right of residence for a period of longer than three months, created or strengthened a family life with a third-country national during genuine residence in a Member State other than that of which he is a national, the provisions of that directive apply by analogy where that EU citizen returns, with the family member in question, to his Member State of origin.

[ Source: http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2014-03/cp140032en.pdf ]

In short, this new ruling outlines the following:

  1. A residence period of at least three months is required (para 54)
  2. Weekend visits and holidays do not count as residence for this purpose (para 59)
  3. Any citizen of the Union can potentially benefit from this right, not just workers and the self employed (references to Article 7 of Citizens Directive 2004/38 , e.g. para 56, and to Article 21 of the TFEU, e.g. para 54)
  4. During the period of residence family life must have been “created or strengthened” (para 51)
  5. Abuse is not allowed (para 58)

( Read more from Colin Yeo on The Free Movement Blog:  Surinder Singh Immigration Route )

I draw particular attention to the fifth point.  Case C-109/01 raised the point of persons deliberately placing themselves into a possition to be beneficiaries of EU points of law.  The ruling outlined that this is not abuse (even if it can be used as part of an assessment leading to “alleged” abuse).

 

FOI Request for definition of 'centre of life' for immigration purposes

Read more of this request here: FOI Request for definition of ‘centre of life’ for immigration purposes

From: European Operational Policy Enquiries
Home Office

1 May 2014

Dear Mr Hook,

Thank you for your email of 4th February to the Home Office Freedom of Information team. Please accept my apologies for the considerable delay in responding. This is due to an administrative oversight on our part.

For convenience, I have decided to consider your email as a general enquiry, rather than as a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, since we do not hold any specific guidance on the question you have asked.

I can confirm that the phrase ‘centre of life’ does not occur within the UK’s domestic Immigration Rules and there is no equivalent phrase therein covering the same criteria. The ‘centre of life’ test is specific to regulation 9 of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006. I previously released guidance to you on how we apply that test (in response to FOI request 30271).

I trust this has clarified matters and I apologise once again for the delay in responding to you.

Kind regards,

P. Grant
European Operational Policy Team
Immigration & Border Policy Directorate
Home Office

FOI Request for definition of ‘centre of life’ for immigration purposes

Read more of this request here: FOI Request for definition of ‘centre of life’ for immigration purposes

From: European Operational Policy Enquiries
Home Office

1 May 2014

Dear Mr Hook,

Thank you for your email of 4th February to the Home Office Freedom of Information team. Please accept my apologies for the considerable delay in responding. This is due to an administrative oversight on our part.

For convenience, I have decided to consider your email as a general enquiry, rather than as a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, since we do not hold any specific guidance on the question you have asked.

I can confirm that the phrase ‘centre of life’ does not occur within the UK’s domestic Immigration Rules and there is no equivalent phrase therein covering the same criteria. The ‘centre of life’ test is specific to regulation 9 of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006. I previously released guidance to you on how we apply that test (in response to FOI request 30271).

I trust this has clarified matters and I apologise once again for the delay in responding to you.

Kind regards,

P. Grant
European Operational Policy Team
Immigration & Border Policy Directorate
Home Office

Surinder Singh for Extended Family Members

Read more of this request here: Surinder Singh for Extended Family Members

International and Immigration
0207 035 4848
Policy Group
(switchboard)
Home Office
www.homeoffice.gov.uk
2 Marsham Street
London
SW1P 4DF
Sarah Goode
By email : request-196403-
[email address]

4 March 2014
Dear Sarah,

FOI Request 30645

Thank you for your email of 07 February, in which you ask for the following information:

“Can you please provide myself with information that you hold on assessing Surinder Singh Route
applications from unmarried partners, or any other extended family member that may live as part of my
household such as my 14 year old brother who I have played a role of mother to for the past six years.”

Your request has been handled as a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act
2000.

The provisions set out in regulation 9 of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006
(as amended), which gives effect to the determination of the Court of Justice of the European Union in
the case of C-370/90 (Surinder Singh) apply only to family members of British citizens.

The relevant definition of „family member‟ is that set out in regulation 7, which is as follows:

(a) his spouse or his civil partner;
(b) direct descendants of his, his spouse or his civil partner who are —
(i)
under 21; or
(ii)
dependants of his, his spouse or his civil partner;
(c)
dependent direct relatives in his ascending line or that of his spouse or his civil
partner;
(d)
a person who is to be treated as the family member of that other person under
paragraph (3).

Persons who do not fal within the definition of „family member‟ as set out above are therefore outside
of the scope of regulation 9 and cannot rely on this provision for a right of residence in the UK.

As this provision is not available to persons who fal within the definition of „extended family members‟
as set out in regulation 8, the Home Office does not hold any information relating to assessing
applications from such persons.


If you are dissatisfied with this response you may request an independent internal review of our
handling of your request by submitting a complaint within two months to the address below, quoting
reference 30645. If you ask for an internal review, it would be helpful if you could say why you are
dissatisfied with the response.

Information Access Team
Home Office
Ground Floor, Seacole Building
2 Marsham Street
London SW1P 4DF
e-mail: [email address]

As part of any internal review the Department’s handling of your information request will be reassessed
by staff who were not involved in providing you with this response. If you remain dissatisfied after this
internal review, you would have a right of complaint to the Information Commissioner as established by
section 50 of the Freedom of Information Act.

Yours sincerely

R Murphy
European Operational Policy Team
Home Office


Can My Parents or My Spouses Parents Benefit From Surinder Singh?

As explained on Who Can Benefit From Surinder Singh The Surinder Singh Route is open to dependant parents of either the EU National or their spouse.  This fact is outlined clearly within  an official response from The Home Office on 29th November 2013 which you can find here: Surinder Singh Route for Parents.

The Home Office responded to the user’s Freedom of Information request with a generic response and treated the request as a general enquiry (as the user had not specifically requested the release of information, but instead requested clarification of Home Office policy).

For ease the actual response from The Home Office is below:

Dear Mr Syal,

Thank you for your email of 8 November to the Home Office Freedom of Information team seeking clarification of whether dependent parents can qualify for residence documentation under the Surinder Singh route.  Your email has been passed to this team to respond to, as we are responsible for policy guidance on European Economic Area (EEA) nationals and their family members.  I understand the Freedom of Information team has advised you that your query is being dealt with as a general policy enquiry, since you are seeking clarification of the policy rather than requesting the release of documents or recorded information held by the Home Office.

I can confirm that the Surinder Singh route applies to direct family members, as defined by regulation 7(1)(a)-(c) of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 (‘the EEA Regulations’), provided they meet the requirements set down in regulation 9 of the EEA Regulations.

Direct family members for these purposes are:

  • the spouse or civil partner of the British citizen, provided they lived with the British citizen in the EEA state in which the British citizen was exercising free movement rights;
  • direct descendants (children, grandchildren) of the British citizen, or of the British citizen’s spouse or civil partner, provided they are aged under 21 or dependent on the British citizen or the British citizen’s spouse/civil partner; and
  • dependent direct relatives in the ascending line (i.e. parents and grandparents) of the British citizen, or of the British citizen’s spouse or civil partner.

Therefore, a financially dependent parent of a British citizen can qualify under Surinder Singh/regulation 9, provided the British citizen was engaged in genuine and effective employment or self-employment in another EEA state before returning to the UK.

You can view the provisions of the EEA Regulations referred to above via the following link: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2006/1003/contents/made

I hope this has clarified the position.

Kind regards,

European Operational Policy Team

Operational Policy & Rules Unit

Immigration & Border Policy Directorate

Home Office