Hi Francis,
So mum was a worker for about 18 months, and was then made involuntary unemployed. Why did she then claim IS? Had she claimed JSA, she would have fully satisfied the three compulsory sub tests in Reg 6(2)(b), and could have used Reg(6)(2)(b)(i) to persist now as a worker, with the worry of the 'genuine chance' requirement to find work.
CIS/3505/2007 comes out saying that someone on IS is not registered for work, despite attending WFIs etc. From memory, it also confirms that whereas the definition of worker must be community law based, the test of registration for work must be domestically based, which would appear to cut down chances of appealing direct to the Residence Directive for assistance, but maybe I am wrong on that.
There was a debate earlier about the status of those wrongly advised to claim IS, not sure what it concluded. Certainly now is a gap now between mum becoming unemployed and any JSA claim, which brings us round to the business of being withdrawn from labour market. Can't see a way around that, unless you can argue mum was wrongly advised to withdraw, and try rescuing her worker status now via Reg 6(2)(b). She would in any sense be a jobseeker if she did that, which would give some kind of legitimacy to her current status here as a qualified person, and family member spin off status to the son.
Steve
|