Fri 08-Feb-08 01:29 PM by Martin_Williams
Dan:
The issue is not with the I(EEA) Regs 06 and the Directive. Rather it is about the specific exclusion for IS purposes about a workseeker being a sufficient right to reside for entitlement to that benefit (ie Reg 21AA (2) and (3)(b) or (d)).
In Collins the ECJ confirmed that a person who was a workseeker could not take advantage of the equal treatment provision in Art 7 of Reg 1612/68 (which is still in force). However, when the R to R test was introduced into social security law in 2004 the UK did not legislate to exclude a person whose only R to R was on that basis from entitlement and therefore you had a situation where until the UK did that (which it did with the above mentioned amendment to the definition of Person from Abroad) this was a sufficient right to reside for benefit purposes.
The issue that is still outstanding (and which I think a claimant could win on) is whether someone who has been an actual worker and then wishes to retain that status whilst unemployed can do so through a claim to IS as opposed to JSA. I do not read Reg 21AA(3)(b) or (d) as excluding a person who retains the status of worker through being unemployed and having registered as a jobseeker with the relevant employment office from entitlement to IS.
|