- 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, Administrator
eu.1-victim wrote:Yes Mr. Malicos,
Apparently, there are some things ongoing with Luxembourg court.
However, the judges already decided for a EU.1 case of a Chinese national:
http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:v0 ... cd=6&gl=ie
So I think in principle what you describe is correct....directive 38/EC/2004 does not require prior residency in another EU member state, as long as you are legally resident in the state at the time when you apply for EU.1.
I wonder if anybody has used this case while appealing a DoJ refusal letter? Please cloud anybody tell me what DoJ have answers, basing their appeals of refusal letters on Jia case as a reference....
Please help me out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dear Sir or Madam,walrusgumble wrote: i can assure you i am not the person
The obvious chauvinism displayed in your remark above, which is so characteristic of the mindless arrogance of Irish politicians, proves without any doubt that your posts on this board pursue the agenda of intimidating and discouraging EU citizens from seeking redress against the serious violations of their EU rights being perpetrated by the ROI government.walrursgrumble wrote:what country are you from? if you are polish or some of the new boys i would not get so cocky, ye will be whinging about europe in time.
The above is incorrect. Ireland continues and will continue to be a net recipient of EU funds until 2013. This is one of the best known scandals regarding the EU budget.walrsugrumbl wrote:Ireland is now paying back the money it owes europe
Dear Mr Malikos,mr.malikos wrote:So you are putting all kind of people together, legal and non-legal immigrants.
But what exactly do they want to do? I mean, how can this be 'reconsidered'?The Court considers that its judgment in the Akrich case, in which it ruled that, in order to benefit from the rights of entry into and residence in a Member State, the non-Community spouse of a Union citizen must be lawfully resident in a Member State when he moves to another Member State in the company of a Union citizen, must be reconsidered. The benefit of such rights cannot depend on prior lawful residence of the spouse in another Member State.
Agreed, but make any and all contact with the DoJ in writing. Verbal communication, be it on the phone or face to face, can easily be forgotten or denied.mr.malikos wrote:Did anybody call so far the helpline or tried to obtain based on the new judgement stamp 4EU Fam?
As the DOJ (as they did in the past) tends to sheet on people...this time we should try to pressurize them give stamp 4 EU Fam. Prior they will invent other barriers etc. Therefore, I will go tonight to them and ask for stamp 4 EU Fam.
It would be very beneficial for all of us if as many people as possible do the same and contact them, by writing or calling them.
In order to not to let them any time to come up with some other stupid stuff or to find excuses to delay now the issuance of stamp 4 EU Fam, which is also one of their favourite strategies to drive people mad, I ask all EU.1 victims to insist now on a very high frequency on their rights that things can move on in our favour in a very timely manner.
So push push, push..... push them now and drive them as mad as they did with us......Best
as far as genuine marriages are concerned, hearthy congratuglations. for others, well , family courts will be busy in 3-4 years time! ya should not be too worried about what i think, more concerned what the council of europe and people such as France's Sarozy thinks, it is very simile to change eu legisaltion.mr.malikos wrote:That means the restrictive approach taken in the Akrich case is obsolete and in the judges eyes the judgement (Akrich) was wrong.
That is just another way to say so....
That means full VICOTRY and stamp 4EU FAM for everybody!!!!!!
There is just a backdoor mentioned at the very end of the text (last page) that penalities may be imposed by the memeber state if the non-EU spouse did not comply previously with national immigration rules. This is so far not further outlined.
However this is still A VERY GOOD DAY for my family and many others.
I wonder what walrusgrumble would say to this judgement......
mr.malikos wrote:So my dear friend walrusgrumble form the DOJ,
As you can see the DOJ was wrong, the minister was wrong, the Irish government was wrong and finally yet importantly, you have been wrong.
It is confirmed now that power to rule its own immigration (EU member states) is limited by EU laws. There is no more space for questionable minister’s directives/"ideas of prior residency etc", which may change overnight or not. Ireland has to comply with this judgment and I guess hundreds maybe thousands of people are affected by this.
As I already mentioned as Ireland signed to the EU it gave up some state/national power. EU.1 is a good case therefore.
I just expect the DOJ nothing less than to reconsider its whole approach to administrate and rule immigration. Even as a person with no juristically expertise, it was for me clear while digging out previous judgements from the EC related to the EU.1 matter, that legal immigrates can profit from directive 34/EC/2004 just on the basis of their marriage to their EU-spouse. So why at all was this stupid directives/"ideas of prior residency etc" implemented at all, when it was already from the beginning very clear that the DOJ would face major difficulties.
This was bad management,
bad risk assessment
and very bad legal advice!
As the minister and his office introduced this bad legislation, I wonder about the processes to introduce legislation.
In other words spoken the ministers car may god hit by a Pakistani Taxi-driver and the next day all Pakistani Taxi-drivers are expelled from Ireland. Would this be the way to rule immigration?
Is this the way legislation works in Ireland?
Are you sure you are a civilised country? An educated country? A christian country? Are you sure Ireland is a country at all?
Who is going to take responsability for this desaster? "ireland deserves better" would be a good solgan to addess to the minister and DOJ.
Best
Mr.malikos
It's a pretty sad comment on Irish society if the majority of Irish people think like you do.walrusgumble wrote: as far as genuine marriages are concerned, hearthy congratuglations. for others, well , family courts will be busy in 3-4 years time! ya should not be too worried about what i think, more concerned what the council of europe and people such as France's Sarozy thinks, it is very simile to change eu legisaltion.
Do you think it's a pity when the government of an EU state acts illegally and corrupt and gets called out for it?kevo wrote: I do think it's a pity that Ireland has been over-ruled by the EU, making a Yes vote on Lisbon II more unlikely; however this decision should be welcomed in general.
Another downside to the decision is that it's likely that Mr. Malikos will be staying in Ireland now.
I don't disagree with most of what you've said, but VRT? Vehicle Registration Tax? Tell me if I'm wrong, but I think the Revenue have absolutely no slowdown at all, in reeling in this controversial tax.sovtek wrote:Do you think it's a pity when the government of an EU state acts illegally and corrupt and gets called out for it?kevo wrote: I do think it's a pity that Ireland has been over-ruled by the EU, making a Yes vote on Lisbon II more unlikely; however this decision should be welcomed in general.
Another downside to the decision is that it's likely that Mr. Malikos will be staying in Ireland now.
This is probably one of few times that the EU checks the excesses of the Irish government and Irish people should be happy that there is a system in place to protect you from such intransigence.
Now if they would just get onto the intentional slowdown of justice in processing visa's, VRT, Corporate tax, bad housing standards, bad food standards, anti competative corruption and cartels then living standards in this place would vastly improve and might resemble something of what most continentals enjoy.