FREE MOVEMENT : COURT SPELLS OUT RIGHT OF RESIDENCE REQUIREMENTS.

The immigrant parent of a child attending school in a host member state has a right of residence without having to prove that he/she has sufficient resources, ruled the EU Court of Justice, on 23 February. Its decision came in response to an application from the Court of Appeal of England and Wales concerning two cases(1) related to interpretation of the new directive on the right of free movement of EU citizens(2). The Court of Appeal asked whether the right of residence for a parent who is the primary caretaker of a child is subject to the requirements set by this directive, in particular the obligation to have sufficient resources so as not to become a burden on the social assistance system.

In the first case, Maria Teixeira, a Portuguese national who was not gainfully employed and not self-sufficient, relied on her capacity as the person who cared for her daughter to claim a right of residence in the United Kingdom, where her daughter resides and attends school, and consequently to claim the right to housing assistance. The second case concerns Nimco Hassan Ibrahim, a Somali separated from a Danish national who worked in the United Kingdom, who has four children with Danish nationality. She was turned down for housing assistance in the United Kingdom because she has never been economically self-sufficient and depends entirely on social assistance. She consequently cannot claim a right of residence in this member state, in conformity with EU law.

The court held earlier, in Baumbast(3), that pursuant to the EU regulation on the free movement of workers(4), the child of a migrant worker has a right of residence when continuing his education in the host member state, whether or not the migrant worker still resides or works in this member state. This right of residence also extends to the parent who is the actual caretaker of the child. The Court of Appeal wished to know whether, since the entry into force of Directive 2004/38/EC (which amends certain provisions of this regulation), the interpretation of the regulation laid own by the Baumbast ruling still...