My client is a French national who came to the UK with his mother from Dominica in 2001 when he was 15. He lives with his mother and step father (who is British). Both of them are working. The client was in school/college until October when he claimed JSA. This has been refused on grounds of no right to reside. I was going to argue that he has a RTR on the grounds that he is a dependent relative of an EU worker but have just found out that his mother is a national of Dominica and not of France, which appears to destroy my argument. I think that I am probably left with arguing that he is a work-seeker who has a genuine chance of being engaged - not very easy to do in the current economic climate, particularly as the client has little work experience.

Any ideas would be gratefully received.

Since he has been residing in the UK for 5 years would he not therefore be exempt from the HRT?

Fri 24-Apr-09 12:12 PM by past caring 2

Any appeal made on that basis will end up being stayed pending the CoA's decision in Lassal - which will itself have to wait the outcome of the CoA's reference of the 5 years issue to the ECJ - i.e. does residence before the UK's 30/4/06 implimentation of the Citzenship Directive count towards the 5 year period.

I cannot see why he hasn't got a RtR directly as a qualified person - i.e. a jobseeker under reg. 6(1)(a) of the 2006 regs. The dept just appear plain wrong on this.

And just to add, the question of whether he is a workseeker who has a genuine chance of being engaged is decided by whether he's capable of entering into and complying with a valid jobseeker's agreement and not by reference to subjective factors such as the present economic climate. His lack of qualifications and work experience is a relevant subjective factor that might prevent his entering into a valid jobseeker's agreement - but only if he were to limit his jobsearch to the professions of barrister or brain surgeon. If he's prepared to take up unskilled employment, why is his chance of being engaged any less genuine than that of all the other unskilled unemployed out there who are currently receiving JSA?

Reg 6(4) says that the EEA national must have 'entered the UK in order to seek employment' but he didn't as he was a child when he arrived - or am I missing something here?

I am unaware of any Commissioner's/Upper Tribunal decisions where the claimant's appeal has failed and the case has turned on their purpose in entering the UK. I'd argue it - I cannot see that the purpose of the reg is to exclude people such as your client from entitlement when they are genuinely jobseeking.

What's the relationship with step-dad btw? client wasn't ever formally adopted, was he?

No, he hasn't been adopted. His mother is in the process of applying for British citizenship.