Non EU Spouses to be Deported

SimpleSam06

This just in the news today:

Thousands of married couples have been issued with notices of intention to deport non-EU spouses, The Irish Times has learned. Kitty Holland reports.

The situation has emerged following a High Court ruling in June which said the Department of Justice was within its rights to insist non-EU spouses of EU citizens must live in another member state before residing here.

The European Commission has confirmed it is investigating the stance taken by the Department of Justice and said that it has received "numerous" complaints from couples affected by the court ruling.

Couples are being issued with "Section 3" letters informing the non-EU spouse that "the Minister proposes to make a deportation order in respect of you" on the grounds of being "unlawfully present in the State".

The letter gives the recipient three options - to leave the State voluntarily, to consent to being deported or to make representations to "remain temporarily in the State" within 15 days.

The Immigrant Council of Ireland (ICI) says it has "about 750 cases" of couples in this situation.

"And that is just those that have come to our offices," says Catherine Cosgrave, legal officer with the ICI. "There will be others going to Citizens Advice Centres, the Migrant Rights Centre and solicitors."

I'm not sure where they pulled that one out of, but it sounds like thousands of couples are in for an exciting few months.

Saruman

Just heard about this. Im not sure it will affect me. I wonder can it only affect people after the ruling was made in June?
It makes no sense. My wife actually did live in the czech republic for about a year. She left a few month after they joined the EU and came here to live with me and we got married.
However that was 2004 so we have been married just over 3 years now so i think she can even apply for citizenship now.

Anyway this is rediculous and anyone affected should take the governemnt to court about this.

Tak3n

3 of mine got shipped back today :mad:

digitally-yours

What a blunder by the Irish department of Justice !!!:mad:


Excellent !:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

Kintarō Hattori

Saruman wrote:

Just heard about this. Im not sure it will affect me. I wonder can it only affect people after the ruling was made in June?
It makes no sense. My wife actually did live in the czech republic for about a year. She left a few month after they joined the EU and came here to live with me and we got married.
However that was 2004 so we have been married just over 3 years now so i think she can even apply for citizenship now.

Anyway this is rediculous and anyone affected should take the governemnt to court about this.

Where is your wife from Saruman?

Exit

This sounds incredibly ridiculous.

What's the reason for having to live in an EU country previously, when Ireland is an EU country?

Terry

Damn. I was hoping to make a quick €15,000.

digitally-yours

Exit wrote:

This sounds incredibly ridiculous.

What's the reason for having to live in an EU country previously, when Ireland is an EU country?

The Reason is when the GOV departments want to say NO but legally cannot say NO

Then they use this process of making the process soo soo lengthy and tedious that everyone should think 3rice before going down that road.

This is the same senario here.


The same story on RTE as well
http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0830/deport.html

SimpleSam06

It could be targetted at asylum seekers who abuse their status, but its going to catch a lot of people in the collateral damage. Thats the only conceivable reason I can come up with for a ruling like this.

seamus

I'm still a little confused on this one.

Are they issuing deportation orders to non-EU spouses of Irish citizens, or non-EU spouses of EU citizens?

In the former case, I always thought that a person married to an Irish citizen was automatically entitled to live here. In the latter case, I can see why the distinction is made but I don't understand the need to deport these people.

It's a very "shoot first, ask question later" approach. If an EU citizen is entitled to live here, no questions asked, then why can't their non-EU spouse live here too?

machiavellianme

It's quite simple. It's to curb people coming here and marrying the first EU national they see so they can stay. Not saying that everyone coming here will do this, but if people really want to live here, they will find a way and go about it through the legal channels. Its quite similar to the US green card scheme and schemes throughout the EU. I'm surprised it took so long to come in here to be honest and hopefully it doesnt cause too much hardship.

bill_ashmount

Tak3n wrote:

3 of mine got shipped back today :mad:

lol

Zzippy

Saruman wrote:

Just heard about this. Im not sure it will affect me. I wonder can it only affect people after the ruling was made in June?
It makes no sense. My wife actually did live in the czech republic for about a year. She left a few month after they joined the EU and came here to live with me and we got married.
However that was 2004 so we have been married just over 3 years now so i think she can even apply for citizenship now.

Anyway this is rediculous and anyone affected should take the governemnt to court about this.

Saruman, are you Irish? This ruling only affects spouses of non-Irish EU citizens residing here, not spouses of Irish citizens. That's according to Newstalk this morning... they had several texts in asking that question.

Saruman

eo980 wrote:

Where is your wife from Saruman?

She is from the US.

And yes it is confusing. It might be a case of it being misreported.
It would make sense if it was the non EU spouses of non Irish, EU citizens who now live here.
Although even that makes no sense as it goes against freedom of movement in the EU. I could move to any EU country i like and take my wife with me.

Zzippy

Saruman wrote:

She is from the US.

And yes it is confusing. It might be a case of it being misreported.
It would make sense if it was the non EU spouses of non Irish, EU citizens who now live here.
Although even that makes no sense as it goes against freedom of movement in the EU. I could move to any EU country i like and take my wife with me.

Yep, makes a mockery of free movement alright. Think there have been loads of complaints to the European Commission so they are looking into it.
If your wife's from the US and you're Irish it won't affect you at all....

wes

Wow, really stupid move by the government (nothing surprising I suppose). I see no reason for them doing this at all, doesn't make a much sense and goes against free movement within the EU.

Love2love

I kinda agree with it. I'm here in Germany at the mo and a friend of a friend has just married a German girl with the intention of moving to Ireland (just him, not her - she is staying here) Now if he must wait until he has been granted German citizenship which takes 2 years, i think, I wonder if he would have married her at all????

digitally-yours

Love2love wrote:

I kinda agree with it. I'm here in Germany at the mo and a friend of a friend has just married a German girl with the intention of moving to Ireland (just him, not her - she is staying here) Now if he must wait until he has been granted German citizenship which takes 2 years, i think, I wonder if he would have married her at all????

i understand your point. But making 1000+ people suffer for the inability of department of justice that they cannot differenciate right from wrong is just plain stupid.

You cannot punish the majority for the deeds of minority.

Croc

They are deporting (Non EU Spouses) of EU Citizens who are not Irish Citizens. If that makes it clearer.

I think you should read the Judgement of The High Court before you start making ill informed judgements, it makes interesting reading.

http://www.courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/09859e7a3f34669680256ef3004a27de/dd1ae65573561111802573400052505f?OpenDocument

In a nutshell the Non EU Spouse attempted to circumvent the Immigration Laws of this country by lying etc. It is him you should be Criticising not The Department of Justice or anyone else involved. As when the person in question was caught out they then ran to the courts (as is there right) and further attempted to frustrate the system.

The Department was then in a position where it could not act on this matter until the Courts had issued a judgement.

Crumble Froo

digitally-yours wrote:

You cannot punish the majority for the deeds of minority.

wrong. you should not punish the majority for the deeds of minority.

egan007

Just an open question - I don't want to be attacked and I remain sympathetic to those affected.

Is it not obvious that somebody that has no EU connection (i.e. born outside the EU and has no paperwork for the EU) should not be allowed within the EU without correct paperwork?

Imagine the Scenario.

I'm from France - a french citizen.
I move to Ireland.
I want marry somebody from India.
- I would expect that they need some kind of clearence from the State in India and Ireland.
- At this point I would image the is due process and paperwork.
- Considering I'm from France i would need paperwork too.

On the off chance that the marrage takes place in France then I assume the French Authorities would have more or less the same process for my spouse from India.

To the people on this thread who are affected,

Did you ever have to file legal documents for your Spouse here?

Saruman

There is no real documentation needed other than proof of marriage. So in my case, and i have not been affected, i brought her into the immigration place on the quays. Showed them our marriage certificate (from Vegas ). That was it. she got her card for the year. Then a year later she just had to go to Mullingar Garda station (we live in westmeath) and got stamped for 3 years i think it was.

Stench Blossoms

Well I suppose its to stop people coming here who only marry for citizenship.

Saruman

I never thought i would say this... but maybe we should have something like the US
INS over there check up on marriages when there is a non US citezen involved to make sure they are in fact married for love and not just convenience.

digitally-yours

Saruman wrote:

I never thought i would say this... but maybe we should have something like the US
INS over there check up on marriages when there is a non US citezen involved to make sure they are in fact married for love and not just convenience.

I Completely agree. So the people who are in genuine relationship do not suffer.
and there is more transparency in system.

seamus

Having read through that court document, I'm really impressed with how quickly the media managed to obfuscate this one and turn it into hysteria.

There are really two things at play here:

1. Every EU country has the right to decide it's own immigration policy. I think we can all agree this is a good thing.

2. Marrying an EU citizen does not automatically entitle you to citizenship of their country. I think we can all agree that this too is a necessary step - it's much more difficult to remove citizenship than to grant it.

So, if I, for example, married an American girl. She would be entitled to live and work here, because I'm Irish. However, she would still need a visa to travel elsewhere in the EU, because she is not a citizen of an EU country.

That's it. There's is nothing more here. What they are doing is deporting people back to the EU country where they are entitled to live and work, because they are not entitled to live and work here.

I really can't believe the fuss that's managed to be made of this.

digitally-yours

Also interesting read from someones blog

Interesting read

http://cartaverde.livejournal.com/tag/eu1


"If you are a EU and non-EU married couple, considering to live and move to somewhere in Europe -- save your life, your mind, time, energy and make it easier, move somewhere where they appreciate you and don't see you only as a problem. Don't come to Ireland, and don't go to Finland either."

This person got the EU spouse visa in 11 months which one is entitled to a decision within 6 months

"Only after 11 months, when the legal limit of Ireland giving that permit and stamp is still 6 months."

Exit

Saruman wrote:

There is no real documentation needed other than proof of marriage. So in my case, and i have not been affected, i brought her into the immigration place on the quays. Showed them our marriage certificate (from Vegas ). That was it. she got her card for the year. Then a year later she just had to go to Mullingar Garda station (we live in westmeath) and got stamped for 3 years i think it was.

If you don't mind me asking, did she need paperwork to get into the country in the first place? Like a 6 month visa or a work permit?

Croc

Exit wrote:

If you don't mind me asking, did she need paperwork to get into the country in the first place? Like a 6 month visa or a work permit?

Work Permits do not in themselves automatically allow you entry into the country, all they do is allow an employer to employ you on the basis that they cannot find a citizen of the EU to preform the job. You can still be refused entry to the country if you arrive with a valid work permit although it rarely happens.


Not everyone requires a Visa to enter the country, for a list of those exempt etc see this link.
http://www.inis.gov.ie/en/INIS/SI657of2006.pdf/Files/SI657of2006.pdf

Persons entering this country from a country that do not require a visa are allowed to remain in the country for 3 months. Thats the standard in most countries. They may not take up employment etc while they are here.

Saruman

Exit wrote:

If you don't mind me asking, did she need paperwork to get into the country in the first place? Like a 6 month visa or a work permit?

No the 3 month visitor stamp was fine. We were having a long distance relationship before we got married. I went to Prague and she came here. When she moved here, she moved for a job. After a week of working for them she asked them about her pps number and then she found out they had assumed she was allowed to work here? Which makes no sense as she was an American citizen so there was no way she could have been allowed. She had discussed this with their HR department before she even left Prague and they said not to worry it would be taken care of.

Anyway we just had to push the wedding forward in the end. In some ways it was a marriage of convenience but we would have been married anyway.

digitally-yours

Deportation notices sent to 120 married non-EU nationals
30/08/2007 - 14:15:38

More than 100 married couples face separation after the Government warned non European spouses they have no right to remain in Ireland, it emerged today.

The Department of Justice confirmed 120 notices of deportation have been posted to men or women from outside the EU who married Irish or European citizens.

Thousands more are at risk of deportation.

The immigration crackdown followed a High Court ruling in June which gave the Government the right to insist that non EU spouses must live legally in another member state before moving to Ireland.

Although the case is currently being challenged in the Supreme Court, the section 3 letter warns the 120 people they have the option to leave voluntarily, to agree to be deported, or to make representations to stay in Ireland temporarily within the next 15 days.

The Justice Department stressed only foreign nationals who entered the country illegally were issued with the notice, adding that none have yet been deported.

Solicitor Derek Stewart, who is taking the case, said those affected can be left in a legal limbo and are unable to work or travel.

The Immigrant Council of Ireland (ICI) maintains 750 people have made contact with its office since the beginning of the year claiming to be affected by the decision.

“This is the biggest single issue we are dealing with at the moment,” said an ICI spokeswoman.

“The vast majority of people who have come to us have been here legally and denied residency.”

The European Commission also confirmed that Brussels has also received a huge number of complaints from non-Irish nationals living in the state affected by the ruling.

Labour’s Justice Spokesman Brendan Howlin said the letters have caused huge fears for families long resident in this country.


“It is my understanding that foreign embassies have been inundated with calls from their citizens,” he said.

“There is a clear requirement for an immediate statement of policy by the Minister for Justice so that families in this country know exactly what their status is and can plan for their future.

“The current uncertainty is unacceptable and inhumane and must be speedily brought to an end.”

A Department of Justice spokeswoman said since the affirmation of the directive in the High Court, 76 of the 120 cases were issued with notices of intention.

In the same time, the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service (INIS) approved and issued 251 residence certificates to non-EEA national spouses who meet the requirements of the Regulations.

Meanwhile, 279 non-EEA applicants who legally entered the state on a visa were refused residence certificates because they could not provide evidence of having been lawfully resident in another Member State prior to coming here.

She said those people concerned can contact immigration officials to renew their original permission to remain.

A small number of applicants are also awaiting decisions.

“In the case of non-EEA national spouses who entered the Irish State illegally and applied for EU Treaty Rights, they are unlawfully present here,” the spokeswoman continued.

“Notices of intention to deport either have or will issue in cases considered in the last two months with a view to their removal from the state.

“As part of the removal process these individuals are entitled to make representations to the Minister for Justice Equality and Law Reform as to why they should be allowed to remain in the state.

“Following an unsuccessful consideration of such an application the applicant may be made subject to a deportation order.”

She added that as the High Court judgement was subject to appeal, no further comment could be made.

source
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mhcwojgbgbid/

Exit

Saruman wrote:

No the 3 month visitor stamp was fine. We were having a long distance relationship before we got married. I went to Prague and she came here. When she moved here, she moved for a job. After a week of working for them she asked them about her pps number and then she found out they had assumed she was allowed to work here? Which makes no sense as she was an American citizen so there was no way she could have been allowed. She had discussed this with their HR department before she even left Prague and they said not to worry it would be taken care of.

Anyway we just had to push the wedding forward in the end. In some ways it was a marriage of convenience but we would have been married anyway.

That sounds incredibly easy! Well done. That's the way it should be done in my opinion.

Ulysses Gaze

This is what happens when the EU frames migration policy documents as Directives. You give far too much discretion to civil-servants as to how they will be enshrined in Irish law. If the EU wishes to stop this then these type of 'laws' should be framed as Regulations where no derogation can take place. That's the way to ensure a uniform system throughout the EU.

Surely a case could be taken against the Irish Government in the ECJ on the basis that Community legislature has recognized the importance of ensuring the protection of the family life of nationals of the Member States in order to eliminate obstacles to the exercise of the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Treaty (art. 10 Reg. 1612/68 and 68/360/EEC)??

mikemac

This will be a disaster for my Russian mail-order bride company :mad:

Dyr

Hopefully this is in retaliation for those dozy bus signs celebrating 50 years of the big happy european family. We only joined in 73 FFS

arybvtcw0eolkf

According to legal experts in the media today it won't affect one single Irish person as its non-eu residents married to eu-residents living in Ireland and not non-eu residents married to Irish citizens.

So I told the ladies in my hareem their safe for stay to service me for another day

SingingCherry

Yes, after a lot of grief this morning, I found out that this is for non-Irish EU citizens married to non-EU spouses. This morning after hearing this and reading it in the Times, which made the whole issue unclear, I called the American Embassy in Dublin to ask what my status would be as I am married to an Irish citizen but obviously non-EU. She told me that this would affect Americans married to Irish citizens. I then panicked.

Luckily my boss got some people on the phone and asked a couple of questions only to find out that the Embassy was wrong -- that this only affects the non-EU spouses of non-Irish EU citizens. Even the Embassy's this morning were confused because of the reports. (Although maybe they shouldn't be giving out advice if they don't know the whole story...)

This is all well and good if they were actually going to give residency permits to the majority of people who are here through legal channels with their EU spouses. But they aren't doing that. These people now have to leave jobs and their life behind, or will be unable to work or travel while waiting for the permit and those decisions are taking a long time to come through. This is not the way to sort out the bad from the good.

zen63

Terrible state of affairs! My heart goes out to the people affected by this.

I sincerely hope that the Irish Government get a substantial reprimand from the European Commission over this, and that it happens quickly.

Its worth pointing out that every stage of marrying a non-EU citizen and subsequently bringing them to Ireland is difficult, takes longer than required by the relevant EU directives, and functions in complete contradiction of the Irish Constitution and EU-Directive 2004/38.

When the EC reprimands Ireland over its actions and the terrible transcription of the directive which has caused this problem, there are grounds for affected couples to seek damages from the Irish Government.

Once again the tax payers will be giving their money away, because the government are too inept and negligent to handle their well paid jobs.

Shame on you Ireland.

Croc

I think most of you are missing the point here, this is not the goverments fault. If you want to blame somone blame the guy who started all this by blantly breaking the law. The Goverment where well aware of the position with respect to (Non EU Spouses) Of Non Irish EU Citizens but where prepaired to ignore it. This guy was blatent in what he did the Goverment had to take a stance in the matter and when they did he ran to the courts. If they did'ent take a stance on this it would have opened a flood gate of people trying to do the same so they had to nip it in the bud. I am sure they where quite willing to ignore those that where already here (despite the fact that they where also technically breaking the law) but where not a blatent as ths guy. As a result of the fact that the matter ended up in the courts it was now public knowledge and they had to be seen to implement the law in the matter with respect to eveyone.

The following is an extract from the judgement.

Background facts
The relevant history of the case is as follows. Whilst still a minor aged fifteen, the first named applicant applied for asylum in Belgium and was refused. He then somehow or other entered the United Kingdom and resided there illegally for a period of approximately three years. It was during this time, we are told, that the relationship between the applicants grew. According to applicants’ solicitor, Mr. Derek Stewart, who swore an affidavit on behalf of and on the instructions of the applicants, the applicants formed an intention to marry when in the United Kingdom and he was instructed that some contact was made with the Home Office in the UK on their behalf, seeking permission for their marriage. Mr. Stewart in para. 6 of his affidavit sworn on 27th June, 2006, says as follows:-

“It seems that in frustration with the length of time it was taking to regularise their position and formalise their marriage, the applicants travelled to Ireland in or about January, 2006, with the intention of the second named applicant finding employment in the State, formalising their marriage and setting up their family home here.”

What the difficulties and delays were in the United Kingdom are not specified. Nor is any single item of correspondence to or from the British Home Office exhibited. Nor is there any evidence that the frustration which they felt caused them to visit a solicitor to enquire as to the reason for the alleged delay and possible steps to do something about it.
In any event, the applicants then entered this State, set up home here and an asylum application was made by the first named applicant on 15th February, 2006. I should observe at this point (and I will return to it later) that, in his application for asylum, he made no reference to his unsuccessful application for asylum in Belgium or the fact that he was illegally resident in the United Kingdom for a period of three years prior to coming to this State.
Upon applying for asylum in this jurisdiction, he was given an information leaflet which advised him, inter alia, that he could make written representations to the Refugee Applications Commissioner. This particular leaflet was a leaflet presented to applicants for such status, informing them of their various rights. It is not in issue that the applicant was aware that he could have his case examined did he wish to do so.
Thereafter, the applicants say that they set up home together and the second applicant secured employment at a service station in the midlands prior to their marriage on 18th May, 2006.
This, according to the respondents, was part of the applicants’ overall plan to circumvent the immigration laws of this State. The first named applicant was a person who would in ordinary circumstances require a valid visa to enter the State. It was the applicants’ intention and understanding that their marriage would obviate the need for an asylum application because the first named applicant would then have the status of a spouse from a non-Member State of a national of a Member State of the EU and would thus be entitled to residency in Ireland.
In the meantime, the first named applicant’s fingerprints, which had been taken when he arrived in this country, were checked by means of a Eurodac search and this revealed that the first named applicant had previously applied for asylum in Belgium. The Irish immigration authorities then made a take back request to Belgium on 2nd May, 2006. A letter from the Belgian authorities dated 31st May, 2006, indicated that the Belgian authorities were agreeable to taking the first named applicant back, pursuant to Article 16(1)(e) of the Council Regulation (EEC) No. 343/2003.

digitally-yours

Croc wrote:

I think most of you are missing the point here, this is not the goverments fault. If you want to blame somone blame the guy who started all this by blantly breaking the law. The Goverment where well aware of the position with respect to (Non EU Spouses) Of Non Irish EU Citizens but where prepaired to ignore it. This guy was blatent in what he did the Goverment had to take a stance in the matter and when they did he ran to the courts. If they did'ent take a stance on this it would have opened a flood gate of people trying to do the same so they had to nip it in the bud. I am sure they where quite willing to ignore those that where already here (despite the fact that they where also technically breaking the law) but where not a blatent as ths guy. As a result of the fact that the matter ended up in the courts it was now public knowledge and they had to be seen to implement the law in the matter with respect to eveyone.

The following is an extract from the judgement.

Background facts
The relevant history of the case is as follows. Whilst still a minor aged fifteen, the first named applicant applied for asylum in Belgium and was refused. He then somehow or other entered the United Kingdom and resided there illegally for a period of approximately three years. It was during this time, we are told, that the relationship between the applicants grew. According to applicants’ solicitor, Mr. Derek Stewart, who swore an affidavit on behalf of and on the instructions of the applicants, the applicants formed an intention to marry when in the United Kingdom and he was instructed that some contact was made with the Home Office in the UK on their behalf, seeking permission for their marriage. Mr. Stewart in para. 6 of his affidavit sworn on 27th June, 2006, says as follows:-

“It seems that in frustration with the length of time it was taking to regularise their position and formalise their marriage, the applicants travelled to Ireland in or about January, 2006, with the intention of the second named applicant finding employment in the State, formalising their marriage and setting up their family home here.”

What the difficulties and delays were in the United Kingdom are not specified. Nor is any single item of correspondence to or from the British Home Office exhibited. Nor is there any evidence that the frustration which they felt caused them to visit a solicitor to enquire as to the reason for the alleged delay and possible steps to do something about it.
In any event, the applicants then entered this State, set up home here and an asylum application was made by the first named applicant on 15th February, 2006. I should observe at this point (and I will return to it later) that, in his application for asylum, he made no reference to his unsuccessful application for asylum in Belgium or the fact that he was illegally resident in the United Kingdom for a period of three years prior to coming to this State.
Upon applying for asylum in this jurisdiction, he was given an information leaflet which advised him, inter alia, that he could make written representations to the Refugee Applications Commissioner. This particular leaflet was a leaflet presented to applicants for such status, informing them of their various rights. It is not in issue that the applicant was aware that he could have his case examined did he wish to do so.
Thereafter, the applicants say that they set up home together and the second applicant secured employment at a service station in the midlands prior to their marriage on 18th May, 2006.
This, according to the respondents, was part of the applicants’ overall plan to circumvent the immigration laws of this State. The first named applicant was a person who would in ordinary circumstances require a valid visa to enter the State. It was the applicants’ intention and understanding that their marriage would obviate the need for an asylum application because the first named applicant would then have the status of a spouse from a non-Member State of a national of a Member State of the EU and would thus be entitled to residency in Ireland.
In the meantime, the first named applicant’s fingerprints, which had been taken when he arrived in this country, were checked by means of a Eurodac search and this revealed that the first named applicant had previously applied for asylum in Belgium. The Irish immigration authorities then made a take back request to Belgium on 2nd May, 2006. A letter from the Belgian authorities dated 31st May, 2006, indicated that the Belgian authorities were agreeable to taking the first named applicant back, pursuant to Article 16(1)(e) of the Council Regulation (EEC) No. 343/2003.

My friend either you work for the Government or either you are very ill informed.

What ever you said is Irrelevant. This is not the way to stop marriage of convenience that you just put an all out ban on everyone.

are you saying that those 1500-2000 couples who will be affected by this they are all marriage of convenience ?

see the attachment and open your eyes. Sooner or later ECJ will take notice of it and Ireland will be fined.

There are EU nationals here working here and paying their taxes since last 6 years and have been denied the right to have their NON eu spouse granted residence here

see attachment for some enlightenment !

Marksie

I have an american friend who is married to an english guy here. They have been her nearly 7 years and have two kids.

I am really worried for her.

I wonder though if it affects americans, if there will be a tit for tat and what the ramnifications for all those Irish living illegally in america will be, as there was a push on to get them recognised.

digitally-yours

Marksie wrote:

I have an american friend who is married to an english guy here. They have been her nearly 7 years and have two kids.

I am really worried for her.

I wonder though if it affects americans, if there will be a tit for tat and what the ramnifications for all those Irish living illegally in america will be, as there was a push on to get them recognised.

I assure you my friend it affects Americans as they are treated as NON EU citizens. and require permission to stay here if longer than 3 months i believe.

Love2love

But I thought the government just wanted that the non-EU spouse lives in their partner's homeland first? Am I correct in this? And aren't they also allowed to appeal the decision and state why the think they should be allowed to remain? I doubt the government will deport someone who has been living here for 10 years, no? I just dont understand what all the fuss is about?

Marksie

seamus wrote:

It's a very "shoot first, ask question later" approach.

I have a true story of where i work which illustrates the mentality of people making these decisions.

I am not going to say where i work but it is part of the CS:

We had an orchard, old established lovely place altogether on the grounds.
Some kids remove part of the old wall and took the apples.

In an effort to stop the kids taking apples they came up with a solution.

Did they rebuild the wall?

No

they destroyed the orchard.

That is what you deal with and voted for

digitally-yours wrote:

I assure you my friend it affects Americans as they are treated as NON EU citizens. and require permission to stay here if longer than 3 months i believe.

Oh dear. No wonder she is so upset.

Terry

So basically if you are married to an Irish national, then you are ok? Yes?

I got a fright there. I thought I was going to lose half of my neighbours.

The guy on one end of the road is middle eastern, the couple next door are English and the guy at the other end of the road is from Cork.

digitally-yours

Ireland has been breaching EU law on this since long time and creating problems.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/commissions/peti/communication/2007/390335/PETI_CM(2007)390335_EN.doc


http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2004_2009/documents/cm/650/650297/650297en.pdf

both worth looking at !

Croc

I am not disageeing with you "digitally" but i think you are missing the point here, this guy applied for assylum in Belgium and was refused after due process. He the left Belgium and entered the UK illegally where he stayed for 3 years. He then entered this country illegally. After arriving he again applied for assylum here and failed to notify the autorities of his failed assylum application in Belgium or the fact that he entered the Uk illegally (I wonder why).

I welcome every migrant to this country be they be EU nationals or Non EU spouces. But we have to draw the line somewhere espically when someone is blatantly breaking the law.

Croc

Terry wrote:

So basically if you are married to an Irish national, then you are ok? Yes?

I got a fright there. I thought I was going to lose half of my neighbours.

The guy on one end of the road is middle eastern, the couple next door are English and the guy at the other end of the road is from Cork.

Yes Terry does not affect spouses of Irish nationals or Spouses of EU Nationals provided they where married and resided in the country of origin of the EU National before moving here.

As per usual the Medial sensationalised it otherwise it does not sell Newspapers.

Croc

Marksie wrote:

I have an american friend who is married to an english guy here. They have been her nearly 7 years and have two kids.

I am really worried for her.

I wonder though if it affects americans, if there will be a tit for tat and what the ramnifications for all those Irish living illegally in america will be, as there was a push on to get them recognised.

If she has been living here for 5 years she should not be affected by this as after 5 years lawful residence she would be able to apply to become an Irish citizen anyway. Or i beleive that was the position just attempted to verify same on Dept of Justice web site but not there at the moment.

digitally-yours

Croc wrote:

I am not disageeing with you "digitally" but i think you are missing the point here, this guy applied for assylum in Belgium and was refused after due process. He the left Belgium and entered the UK illegally where he stayed for 3 years. He then entered this country illegally. After arriving here he again applied for assylum here and failed to notify the autorities of his failed assylum application in Belgium or the fact that he entered the Uk illegally (I wonder why).

I welcome every migrant to this country be they be EU nationals or Non EU spouces. But we have to draw the line somewhere espically when someone is blatantly breaking the law.

I respect your opinion croc.

All my point is that they are applying that Judgement to 1500-2000 people who have not entered Ireland illegally and have not conducted marriage of convenience. They are living here and paying taxes with their EU spouses.Why they are being applied the law which has no connection to them ?

I understand that guy was illegal.I read the whole judgement.
That judgement should apply to people who are in the same situation and are trying to take advantage of the system.people who are in genuine relationship and have kids and are normally married like other people should not be treated like the worst case senario.

Irish department of justice has no planning and is very disorganized and cannot figure out how to differenciate between a genuine and a fake case and now they are pushing the responsibility on applications but applying the same judgement to everone.

Do you think its fair ?

I know u all complain about call centres and etc etc
Now here is the deal call this number 016167700 <department of justice options 3 and then option 2> in morning and see if you are able to get through before 15 minutes. and then ask a question and see the responce
i kid you not you will be shocked :eek:

mikeruurds

My wife and I have been living in Ireland for the last 3.5 years. I was here for 2 years before that on my own doing the hard graft to save up for her relocation costs as well as our wedding and honeymoon. I am a Dutch national and my wife is South African. My parents moved to South Africa while I was a young lad and I met, courted and got engaged to my wife over a 4 year period there before coming to Ireland. We got married in December of 2003 and we both relocated to Dublin permanently.

We've been honest tax-paying residents here for almost 4 years now and intend on staying indefinitely, but this news has us really worried. If I had met my wife in Holland then there would be no problem, but due to the fact that I spent 20 years in South Africa I'm now being discriminated against. I'm being accused of being involved in a marriage of convenience purely because I met, fell in love with and married my wife in South Africa and not Holland. I'm not some scam artist trying to aid and abet an illegal to remain in this country. We're honest people just trying to get by in a country that, until now, welcomed us with open arms.

I just don't get it. Surely the point of this legislation is to isolate the scammers and punish them and not to bother the honest law-abiding EU nationals and their families who are contributing?

Mike