Court of Appeal – Ahmad v Home Office (2014) EWCA Civ 988
EEA national student -requirement to have Comprehensive Sickness Insurance Cover
Quick update for you regarding an EEA appeal that was decided on 16th July 2014 at the Court of Appeal.
SUMMARY – Nationals of member states of the European Union (‘EU’) have the right to move to and live in other member states of the EU, and that right of residence extends to family members, including spouses.
The spouse may, if the European citizen (‘EEA national’) fulfills the required conditions, obtain a permanent residence card in the EEA state to which they move. The question raised in this appeal concerned the required condition that the EEA citizen should have Comprehensive Sickness Insurance Cover, when they were studying in the UK.
THE FACTS OF THE CASE – The appellant, a Pakistani national, had been living with his wife, a Danish national and therefore an EEA citizen, in the UK since August 2006. Mr Ahmad enterd the UK lawfully to join her. Mrs Ahmad then ceased to be a worker.
She was a student from Jan ’09 – July ’12 and as such was arguably required to, but did not have, Comprehensive Sickness Insurance Cover (CISC). This comes directly from the European Directive. The 2006 EEA Regulations implement the Directive into UK law.
Article 7(1) (d) of the Directive 2004/38/EC states students should have Comprehensive Sickness Insurance Cover and sufficient resources not to become a burden on the Social Assistance system of the host Member state.
Mr Ahmad had worked in the UK and paid NI for 5 years. He applied for a Permanent Residence Card to confirm his right to reside in the UK.
Article 7(2) of the Directive states, ‘The right of residence provided for in para 1 shall extend to family members who are not nationals of a Member state, accompanying or joining the Union Citizen in the host member state, provided that the Union citizen satisfies the conditions referred to in para 1 (a) (b) or (c).’
Mr Ahmad contended that Mrs Ahmad satisfied the condition that she should have CSIC in the UK because she was entitled to use the NHS and did not need private health cover to do so.
The Court said that the answer to this appeal depended on whether one made a dynamic interpretation of the Directive, ie whether it was enough that the conditions were substantially filled, or whether you should make a strict interpretation so there is literal compliance with the conditions.
POINT OF LAW ESTABLISHED BY THE CASE
In light of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, the Court concluded that the Upper Tribunal were correct. An entitlement to free NHS treatment does not satisfy the requirement under the Regulations and the Directive for a student who is an EEA national to have CSIC.
HOW DOES THIS AFFECT YOU ?
If you are the family member of an EEA national studying in the UK, then both they, and you, should have CSIC in order to obtain confirmation of the right to reside in the UK.
`