anya05 wrote:Hi everyone
Its my first time on here but have been reading all u guys post..I have received my refusal from HO 1. They dont see any reason why my daughter cant live with her dad, and if the dad is employed or unwilling to take care of his child thats not a reason for him not to have her. We have been separated over 7yrs now my daughter is 8 and cant even remember him.
2.Moreover u work 36 hours at night, the person/persons she stay with can have her whilst I go home.
please help I need some advice they direct me to article 8 and right to appeal. Also I have an application pending since 2001 under marriage when we separate they HO was notify by my solicitor and my solicitor ask for my case to be turn over to article8, but no reply.
1) a child minder is not a primary carer.
it is like saying "because the child goes to school then place the kid with social services"
2) ensure you raise article 24 - rights of children TFEU up, as this is a key right that children have...
Whilst we are arguing two points on my wifes appeal - take a look at our
appeal letter for some ideas...
and ensure you raise the actual wording of TFEU 20:
The case of Ruiz Zambrano (Case C-34/09 of the European Court of Judgement (ECJ)
http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/2011/C3409.html) had the following ruling:
Article 20 TFEU is to be interpreted as meaning that it precludes a Member State from refusing a third country national upon whom his minor children, who are European Union citizens, are dependent, a right of residence in the Member State of residence and nationality of those children, and from refusing to grant a work permit to that third country national, in so far as such decisions deprive those children of the genuine enjoyment of the substance of the rights attaching to the status of European Union citizen.
Note that there are numerous articles to be found on Google in relation to this case. I list a few of the webpages here:
http://www.ein.org.uk/blog/how-zambrano ... egulations
http://www.freemovement.org.uk/2011/03/ ... onsidered/ http://www.latitudelaw.com/news/family- ... r-effects/
http://www.eucharter.org/home.php?page_id=31
remember that the court must be guided by the primary consideration of the child’s best interests (Article 24(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’))...
and of the same charter... 24(3) states:
3. Every child shall have the right to maintain on a regular basis a personal relationship and direct contact with both his or her parents, unless that is contrary to his or her interests.
NOTE: Skype, ETC is not DIRECT contact... < and this is established as a RIGHT in the TFEU. - Nobody - even a court, can argue with such clear wording!
Article 24 of the Charter is based on the New York Convention on the Rights of the Child signed on 20 November 1989 and ratified by all the Member States, Article 3 of which provides that, ‘n all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration’.
