Non EU Spouses to be Deported

Exit · 30-08-2007 02:57PM

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 · 30-08-2007 03:25PM

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 · 30-08-2007 03:29PM

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

Dyr · 30-08-2007 03:41PM

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 · 30-08-2007 04:14PM

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 · 30-08-2007 04:32PM

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 · 30-08-2007 05:06PM

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 · 30-08-2007 06:56PM

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 · 30-08-2007 08:06PM

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 · 30-08-2007 08:16PM

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 · 30-08-2007 08:20PM

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 · 30-08-2007 08:24PM

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 · 30-08-2007 08:24PM

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 · 30-08-2007 08:46PM

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 · 30-08-2007 08:52PM

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 · 30-08-2007 08:59PM

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 · 30-08-2007 09:01PM

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 · 30-08-2007 09:10PM

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 · 30-08-2007 09:13PM

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 · 30-08-2007 09:17PM

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

Croc · 30-08-2007 09:18PM

digitally-yours wrote:

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:

As i respect yours, but unfortunatly these people have become casualties of the fallout from what this guy attempted to do. I beleive they should be left here and it is wrong of the goverment to make them suffer for the sins of others.

mikeruurds · 30-08-2007 09:19PM

Croc wrote:

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.

Unfortunately at the moment the naturalisation process is taking anything up to 3 years from submission of the application to the time that a decision has been made.

The Department of Justice are struggling.

Croc · 30-08-2007 09:20PM

mikeruurds wrote:

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

Agreed Mike, hope you don't suffer as a result of this.

digitally-yours · 30-08-2007 09:23PM

mikeruurds wrote:

Unfortunately at the moment the naturalisation process is taking anything up to 3 years from submission of the application to the time that a decision has been made.

The Department of Justice are struggling.

Thats correct information a year ago it was taking 18 months now taking 3 years
definately making an improvement here

Well done Depatment of Justice !

mikeruurds · 30-08-2007 09:25PM

Croc wrote:

Agreed Mike, hope you don't suffer as a result of this.

Me too

I'll know on the 18th Jan 2008 when my wife's current Garda card expires and we're once again sat in front of a totally disinterested civilian admin clerk in the Burgh Quay Garda Immigration Bureaux hoping for a renewed card.

It's the one time in the year that I feel like an absolute criminal. We're planning on getting my wife Dutch nationality to avoid all of this nonsense, but that's another bureacratic nightmare that'll take us to the end of 2008 to get resolved, so I'm really praying for a miracle to happen at the GNIB in Jan-08

Who ever said life would be easy?

Mike

Love2love · 30-08-2007 09:26PM

digitally-yours wrote:

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 ?

And how do you propose the deal with it? A lot of people in Ireland are screaming at the government to do something and when they do, someone else will have a problem with it. You cannot please all the people. To call them disorganized, is a very quick assumption, do you think that they have not viewed other angles and are prepared for the backlash from the public?? For once they are doing something that does not effect the nationals and they are still getting grief for it. I do empathize with the few who will be effected by this law but if they are truly genuine then they will be able to convince the authorities that they should be allow to stay, no?

Terry · 30-08-2007 09:26PM

Croc wrote:

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.

I certainly do not.

mikeruurds, I think you will be ok. It's not like you're trying to scam anyone. Having lived in SA for 20 years is a viable reason to find and fall in love with someone.
I get the impression they are only going after the scammers.
as an aside, do you like firckendellas? I'm not sure if I have spelt that correctly. Basically they are Dutch horse sausages. My friends brother in-law (Dutch guy) brings them over sometimes. I love them.

mikeruurds · 30-08-2007 09:27PM

Maybe it's time for us to make a sprog... might help when the deportation letter comes

My wife wouldn't be too happy if she got wind of my scheme!!

Mike

mikeruurds · 30-08-2007 09:31PM

Terry wrote:

I certainly do not.

mikeruurds, I think you will be ok. It's not like you're trying to scam anyone. Having lived in SA for 20 years is a viable reason to find and fall in love with someone.
I get the impression they are only going after the scammers.
as an aside, do you like firckendellas? I'm not sure if I have spelt that correctly. Basically they are Dutch horse sausages. My friends brother in-law (Dutch guy) brings them over sometimes. I love them.

frikkadelle... that's the Afrikaans spelling anyway. But they're meatballs in SA. It would be of a similar consistency to the Dutch offering though. I ate a bit of horse when I lived in Holland with my folks. A lot of people eat it :eek:

We have boerewors in SA which would be similar to firckendellas except it's made with a beef and pork mix rather than horse. They don't quite appreciate the flavour of horse meat in South Africa

lostexpectation · 31-08-2007 05:10AM

digitally-yours wrote:

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.

NON eu spouse granted residence here [/B]

see attachment for some enlightenment !

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.

disgracful!

“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.”

horrific!

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.

shocking!

sick sick sick how do these people live with themselves, they should be burned at the stake

that case doesn't seem to a marriage of convenience it seems he evaded/didn't follow the the law but it doesn't seem like a fake marriage

we all marry for convenience how else do you afford a house here?

Non EU Spouses to be Deported

Comments