Chaos!
Having bought the tickets because the airline said my wife can board, the airline check-in head called me today to say my wife can't. The man told me the ITALIAN POLICE will not let her board, because she doesn't have a visa! I asked him to give me this in writing, which he refused to do, merely suggesting I might like to get a refund. He told me, among other stupid things, that what the immigration officer says is more important than what the Directive says. I seem to remember the Directive says that no member state can stop a union citizen and his family member to leave to go to another member state. This man called the British Embassy who insists she needs a visa or an EEA or whatever INDEPENDENTLY of the fact I live in the UK or in Italy. Apparently Surinder Singh and Regulation 9 of the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006/1003 has been revoked by the Embassy in Rome.
The British Solvit wrote me again:
am sorry for the delay in responding to your further e-mail.
Taking your second point first, Article 5.2 of Directive 2004/38/EC provides that the possession of a residence permit shall exempt a family member of an EU national from the visa requirement. Many Member States, including the United Kingdom, interpret this requirement as meaning that the holder of a UK residence permit, for example, is exempt from the requirement to obtain a UK visa. At this present time, there is no EU-wide format for the residence permit and so it is not intended to be a document that should be recognised outside of the country in which it is issued. If your wife holds an Italian residence permit, this is relevant only for her return to Italy, it will not exempt her from the requirement to obtain a visa to enter another Member State.
The summary of the Surinder Singh Judgement contains the following:
A national of a Member State might be deterred from leaving his country of origin in order to pursue an activity as an employed or self-employed person in the territory of another Member State if, on returning to the Member State of which he is a national in order to pursue an activity there as an employed or self-employed person, his conditions were not at least equivalent to those which he would enjoy under Community law in the territory of another Member State. He would in particular be deterred from so doing if his spouse and children were not also permitted to enter and reside in the territory of that State under conditions at least equivalent to those granted by Community law in the territory of another Member State.
Article 9 of the EEA Regs require the citizen to be returning to the United Kingdom, wording taken directly from the Judgement summary which requires the citizen to be returning to pursue an activity as an employed or self employed person. The Judgement takes precedence as it establishes what is the legal requirement. We do not consider a visit or a holiday to be the same as returning to pursue an economic activity, and so any application on behalf of your wife should be made in accordance with UK immigration requirements.
Now, where in Regulation 9 does it say I need to be returning to work? Since when is case-law above the regulation, if it dates from BEFORE the Directive? What about the inital right of residence of 3 months? The article is written in THE PRESENT TENSE! "...is working in the Member state..."
The Directive talks about the Residence card. Solvit tries to tell me The UK regulations are ABOVE the Directive, that the Italian residence card is not valid because the EU doesn't have a uniform format! Stuff and nonsese!!!! All other documents from the Commission say the contrary!
I'm desperate. Maybe we should take the train after all and then the ferry.
All day I've been calling Solvit in Rome and sending them floods of faxes to see how to solve this. They don't seem to know what to do either.
The chap from the airline gave me this link, which seems to me about 3 years old:
http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/fsj/fr ... try_en.htm
In support for his view.
They did confuse Schengen with the EEA 
. I spoke to another policeman after. When he said it was not possible for her to embark he got shirty and said that if I could show him this law that says my wife can board they'll let her on the plane. And I'd have to sign a paper taking full responsibility if they send her back from the UK.
