EUROPEAN UNION LAW

Sources: A bibliography must be given at the end and any other sources acknowledged. References should be given at the bottom of each page as footnotes.
Question

Andrzej, a Polish national, recently came to the United Kingdom with his partner Isabela and their two children Katarzyna and Marek. Andrzej obtained a job for a few hours a week where he was paid a salary that was below the minimum wage. He discovered that UK nationals who worked at the factory and who did the same job as him were paid a higher amount and received more holidays than he did. He wished to obtain a social security benefit to top up his income, but was told that, as a non-UK national he did not qualify for this.

Isabela applied for a job as a civil servant. Her application was refused on the ground that this job was open to UK nationals only.
She then applied to be a hotel receptionist. Although she had passed English language exams in Poland she was required to sit for an English language test. She was told that her mark in the test was not high enough so she did not get the job (which was offered to a UK national), although she argued that her English was good enough for this type of work.

Katarzyna is aged 16 and has left school. After coming to the UK, she applied to do a secretarial course at a local college. She had to pay a fee to do the course but later discovered that she was charged a higher fee than UK nationals who had done the same course as her.

Marek was aged 18 and applied to a UK university in Scotland therefore would be living away from his family. He applied for a loan and other financial support while he undertook his course, but he was told that as a non UK national he did not qualify for this.

Andrzej applied for a family rail card. This was refused on the ground that the family had not been resident in the UK for five years.

The family have now encountered some difficulties with the UK authorities. To supplement his income, Andrzej had been selling counterfeit goods. He was convicted of fraud and sent to prison for three months.

Isabela was convicted and fined for shoplifting. Katarzyna was caught using illegal drugs at college and was cautioned. Marek went on a march with some of his fellow students in Scotland. The march turned violent and Marek was arrested for unruly behaviour.

The UK authorities have now decided that the whole family should have their UK residence terminated and be deported.

.

Critically discuss and advise Andrzej, Isabela, Katarzyna and Marek how EU Law relating to the free movement of persons (Art 45 TFEU) can be argued to the above events.

SOURCES / READING LIST

1 Steiner & Woods, “EU Law”, 11th Edition, 2012, chapters (check contents).

2 Craig & De Burca,”EC Law: Text,Cases,& Materials”,5th edition, (check content for relevant chapters).

3 Wyatt & Dashwood,”European Community Law”,chapters (check contents).

4 Weatherill,S,”Cases and Materials on EU Law”, chapters (check contents)

5 A Kaczorowska, “European Union Law”, 1st Edition 2009, Cavendish

6 Green,Hartley and Usher,”The Legal Foundations of the Single
European Market”.

7 Ward “A Critical Introduction to European Law”,3rd Edition,2009,Cambridge.
 

RECENT JOURNAL ARTICLES

Please note: The following ELR and CMLR journal articles can be accessed from Infolinx. Select the E-journal option and type ”European Law Review” or “Common Market Law Review”.

Journal articles are also available in paper format in the library (Regent Campus Library, Little Tichfield Street).

1 Who funds the mobile student? Shedding some light on the normative
assumptions underlying EU free movement law: Commission v. Netherlands
Case C-542/09, European Commission v. Kingdom of the Netherlands,
Judgment of the Court of Justice (Second Chamber) of 14 June 2012, nyr.
(Common Market Law Review 50: 203–216, 2013).
2 Skovgaard-Petersen H, “There and back again: portability of student loans, grants and fee support in a free movement perspective”
(European.Law Review 2013, 38(6), 783-804)
3 Reynolds S, “Exploring the “intrinsic connection” between free movement and the genuine enjoyment test: reflections on EU citizenship after Iida”
(European Law Review, 2013, 38(3), 376-392)

4 O’Brien c, Case C-310/08 London Borough of Harrow v. Nimco Hassan Ibrahim and Secretary of State for the Home Department, Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 23 February 2010, and

Case C-480/08 Maria Teixeira v. London Borough of Lambeth and Secretary
of State for the Home Department, Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of
23 February 2010
(Common Market Law Review 48 203–225, 2011)

5 Currie S, “Accelerated justice or a step too far? Residence rights of non-EU family members and the court’s ruling in Metock”
(European Law Review 2009, 34(2), 310-326)

6 Costello C, “Metock: Free Movement and Normal Family Life in the Union”
(Common Market Law Review 46: 587-662, 2009)

7 O’Brien C, “Social Blind Spots and Monocular Policy Making: The ECJ’s Migrant Worker Model”
(Common Market Law Review 46: 1107-1141, 2009)