- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, Amber, archigabe, batleykhan, ca.funke, ChetanOjha, EUsmileWEallsmile, JAJ, John, Obie, push, geriatrix, vinny, CR001, zimba, meself2
Yes. Under the common travel area (CTA) arrangement, Irish citizens who move to the UK are automatically and immediately considered settled.noajthan wrote:As an Irish citizen, my understanding, is you are already considered as settled
No, being Irish does not confer right of abode. Only Commonwealth citizens may have right of abode in the UK, and the only way to acquire it now is to become a British citizen.noajthan wrote:As an Irish citizen, my understanding, is you are already considered as settled and have a right of abode in UK due to special UK/Irish-related legislation and the CTA.
Indeed, there seem to be complications to the whole business of the Irish being settled. On reading the Immigration Act 1971, it would seem that people who have never left the British Isles are settled if ordinarily resident in the UK, but that may well be wrong for those born in the UK. The Home Office doesn't accept the claim. I look forward to an explanation based on law as opposed to practice.noajthan wrote:Stand by for someone more knowledgeable to fill in the gaps and correct any errors here.
The first is for EEA permanent residence. Being married to a British citizen will allow you to naturalise once you've been married for 3 years, which will be in 2017. You could apply for ILR on the basis of 10 years long residence.TimeInvariant wrote:1. What is the best route for me to apply – as someone who has spent more than 5 years here working, or as someone who is married to a British citizen?
Just choose the easiest 5 consecutive years to prove.TimeInvariant wrote:2. Will I need to show my travel records and bills for more than 5 years (I’ve been here over a decade). 5 is possible, 10+ years records impossible for me.
That's fine, but irrelevant unless you're planning to naturalise.TimeInvariant wrote:3. Does my marriage have to have been in the UK? It was in Canada, in 2014
Sorry about that mistake.Casa wrote:"Being married to a British citizen will allow you to naturalise once you've been married for 3 years," A misunderstanding here. It's not a requirement to have been married to a BC for 3 years, but to have been legally resident in the UK for 3 years and also have been granted PR (or ILR).
Hi - and thank you! Sorry it took so long to reply - I could not work out how to search this message board for previous posts!LilyLalilu wrote:You are not legally required to give this information for the purpose of EEA PR. If you use the form, you will need to disclose this information because the form asks for it. If you do not wish to disclose this information, just apply by letter or use an old version of the form.
But tbh, they cannot refuse you a confirmation of PR for this anyway, so you may as well disclose it, doesn't make any difference
Wow! I really wish I'd looked for this before I went through the enormous form (which I swear took weeks just to get my head around, not to mind the time to fill it in..)noajthan wrote:Its not a mandatory nor legal requirement to use the latest 'monster' PR form.
You could go commando and apply by letter.
Or take a look at this PR form a member has compiled by mashing a previous/simpler PR form with the up-to-date HO contact and other details:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/128 ... ple_v2.pdf
Suggest printing a few copies off and trying a few dry runs with your information (& all supporting evidence) - see how it all shapes up.
It is not a requirement of EU law to report on council tax liability.TimeInvariant wrote:...
I have more recent council exemption info (from when my wife was a student), but not 10+ years ago for myself.
Since it's outside the 5 year period, is it absolutely necessary to my application to show this - or must the evidence for council tax exemption cover all the years I've been resident in the UK?
It's the last piece of evidence I'm really struggling to get a hold of
Unlikely that such a copy would exist as the Immigration Act 1971 and the European Communities Act 1972 are almost of the same age, as it were.Richard W wrote:I tried digging out a pre-Common Market version of the Immigration Rules to see what they said about Irishmen entering the CTA in the UK, but I couldn't find a copy.
Indeed, I think that was the intent of the law.Richard W wrote:they don't bother about how an Irishman got to the UK to determine whether his children born in the UK are British. After all, he can just take a stroll across the border and back, and, hey presto, he's settled if he's ordinarily resident!
Thus, Irish citizens are not to be considered "foreigners" or "aliens" in terms of UK law. Later changes, such as the Immigration Act 1971 and British Nationality Act 1981 defined patriality and right of abode with regards to the United Kingdom and Islands (the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man), but did not alter the status of Irish citizens in the UK. Thus Irish citizens, not being British citizens, are not foreigners either and hence are treated as being settled on arrival, wherever they arrive from. It is not their travel from within the CTA that gives them their status, but their citizenship of the Republic of Ireland.It is hereby declared that, notwithstanding that the Republic of Ireland is not part of His Majesty’s dominions, the Republic of Ireland is not a foreign country for the purposes of any law in force in any part of the United Kingdom...and references in any Act of Parliament,..., whether passed or made before or after the passing of this Act, to foreigners, aliens,...shall be construed accordingly.
Given that the constitution of the UK is based on practice rather than law, I would not be fussed about the difference between the two. Conventions (codified practice) have as much force as written statute. Some of the things that we take for granted in the UK are merely conventions/practices and not enacted law.Richard W wrote: I look forward to an explanation based on law as opposed to practice.
Given that Irish citizens are treated as settled for the purpose of Section 1(1) of the BNA 1981, I would find it strange if they were not to be considered "settled" for any other section (such as Section 6(2)) of the same Act.TimeInvariant wrote:I would need it (a reference to PR) if I wanted to naturalise as a British citizen, I believe.
Thanks to the CTA, Irish citizens do not have to invoke EU treaty rights and work towards acquiring PR. You will still be considered settled in UK due to the CTA.TimeInvariant wrote:Hi,
A last question if anyone can answer this - in the situation that my certificate of PR was refused - what would that mean? (It's fairly unlikely, since I meet all the requirements for PR, and I'm an EEA national)
Would I be still entitled to stay in the UK - or would I be required to leave?
Is it a risk that I'm applying for a PR certificate?
Thanks!
May I pick your brain then - would non-CTA folk have trouble with this? E.g. my colleague is Polish and going through the same process. If that colleague didn't pass the PR requirements, having applied for PR and not acheived it, would they be required to leave?noajthan wrote:Thanks to the CTA, Irish citizens do not have to invoke EU treaty rights and work towards acquiring PR. You will still be considered settled in UK due to the CTA.TimeInvariant wrote:Hi,
A last question if anyone can answer this - in the situation that my certificate of PR was refused - what would that mean? (It's fairly unlikely, since I meet all the requirements for PR, and I'm an EEA national)
Would I be still entitled to stay in the UK - or would I be required to leave?
Is it a risk that I'm applying for a PR certificate?
Thanks!
Yes, possibly. As, in general, EEA nationals are covered by EU law.TimeInvariant wrote:...
May I pick your brain then - would non-CTA folk have trouble with this? E.g. my colleague is Polish and going through the same process. If that colleague didn't pass the PR requirements, having applied for PR and not acheived it, would they be required to leave?
(I know I'm going down the rabbit hole with these questions - my apologies)
It is therefore quite possible for a DCPR to be refused in circumstances in which a RC would be issued. What is the case is that when a DCPR is refused then there is likely to be an investigation of whether the EEA national is currently lawfully present.noajthan wrote:HO has the option of administrative removal if an EEA national is not exercising treaty rights after the initial 3 months grace period.