- 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
if zambrano was before another group of judges it may have lost.i honestly can't predict the minds of those judges.i'm certain that irish judges will attach themselves to the distiction made by the ag that here mcarty could have used metock & move elsewhere while in zambrano the minor child could not & unlikely succeed on basis of chen and definitely wont comply with the directive.see footnote of ag opinion.c&z are exceptional cases and are rarely cited when there are no minors. it goes back to my point eu can't dictate on areas it has no competence,internal matters.Monifé wrote:Thanks Walrusgumble. I had already read it earlier.
Bad news so
Would my case still have a chance the fact that I am a worker and the department issued me with a permanent residence certificate?
Would us arguing Zambrano work?
Obie, Ben, any advice?
paragraphs 53,54&56 are key.they distinguish you from cases you want to rely on.it looks like it dont matter if you worked.if the state plays hard nose they will say it was amistake & illegal to give you pr.i dont think that would work.you are free to travel as an irish person.but,what happens if you cant get work over there are you then deprived of your family?state might settle with you in the quite considering the pr chicken upMonifé wrote:Thanks Walrusgumble. I had already read it earlier.
Bad news so
Would my case still have a chance the fact that I am a worker and the department issued me with a permanent residence certificate?
Would us arguing Zambrano work?
Obie, Ben, any advice?
Obie for once in your life start to act a bit humble. You lot have been proven completely wrong with this case. I have been attacked so many times by muppet amateur experts , most from non eu countries, telling me, an eu citizen, what eu law actually stands for and telling me what i voted on or what be believed we voted on in 1992. If you read it, I said its a possibility now. But I also said I don't see that working, for legal reasons ie mistake as to law is not always a defence, moreover, it might not be considered a mistake to law as it was only announce after the act.Obie wrote:I strongly believe the authorities will be unable to withdraw or revoke your Permanent Registration Certificate, when it was not issued by mistake, misrepresentation or deception. They haven't even claimed that this was the case. The only person that made this claim was their spokesman Mr Walrusgrumble.
All through your court case, i don't think they have alleged through their representative that you should not have the permanent Registration certificate.
The first step in them limiting your rights as Union Citizen, is to first revoke the Registration certificate, which they have not done or expressed an intention to do.
They are simply rejecting your rights.
As the courts clearly stated, the right of Mr McCarthy was linked to his wife, which is why his case was put on hold pending the decision in her wife application for Permanent registration Certificate.
As your right has not been withdrawn, i believe that will be the starting point for the Judge.
In paragraph 46-48 of the judgement, the court did not expressly state that people in Mrs McCarthy's situation can never claim their rights under Zambrano ruling. However it stated that the description of Mrs McCarthy by the national court, doesn't fit her in this position. Therefore it was the description in paragraph 14 that affected her. This means that there is really not a general ban on people with dual nationality claiming a right of residence under a different nationality.
I believe inspite of this judgement, you have an arguable case, expecially when the Irish Authority has not mention anything in their acknowledgement of service, that your registration Certificate has been revoked, or was wrongly issued.
Procedural unfairness in civil law is usually overturned in Judicial review.
I still believe you have a good case in my opinion for JR, before even the Judge looking into the McCarthy ruling.
walrusgumble wrote:What about the legal submissions?
walrusgumble wrote:Why would the Department mention anything in their letter about revoking the card when it stated we do not consider you as British for immigration purposes?
2 days if your lucky.i see but that is around about way of saying,strictly for immigration purposes in this scenerio,we dont recognise your british nationality.they were clever as they simply need to stick to the line they have and say mccarthy supports this.Monifé wrote:walrusgumble wrote:What about the legal submissions?
Our solicitor said they should be sent 3 weeks before the hearing date (26th May) but that the department hardly ever follows the rules and usually sends them in a few days before the hearing.
walrusgumble wrote:Why would the Department mention anything in their letter about revoking the card when it stated we do not consider you as British for immigration purposes?
They never stated that. They said the reason for refusal of my partners residence card was due to the fact that his partner (me) is an Irish National living in Ireland and that it is requirement to move to or reside in an EU member state other than that of which they are a national.