Ahmad v Secretary of State for the Home Department

Judgment

Lady Justice Arden :

An EEA citizen, that is, a national of one of the member states of the EU or of one of the countries in the European Economic Area (“EEA”), has valuable rights under the EU treaties, including the right to move to other states of the EU, and reside there. That right is also granted to his or her family members, including a spouse. The spouse may, if the EEA citizen fulfilled the required conditions , obtain a permanent residence card in the EEA state (“host state”) to which she moves. The question in this appeal concerns the required condition that the EEA citizen should have had comprehensive sickness insurance cover (“CSIC”).

The appellant, Mr Shakil Ahmad, is a Pakistani national who has been living with his wife, Mrs Ahmad, a Danish citizen and therefore an EEA citizen, in the UK since August 2006. Mrs Ahmad entered the UK to exercise her treaty rights as a worker from April 2006. Mr Ahmad lawfully entered the UK to join her. Mrs Ahmad then ceased to be a worker. She was a student from about January 2009 to about July 2012. As such, she was required to have, but did not have, CSIC.

This follows from Article 7(1)(d) of the Directive 2004/38/EC (“the Directive”):

“Article 7

1. All Union citizens shall have the right of residence on the territory of another Member State for a period of longer than three months if they:

“….(c) – are enrolled at a private or public establishment, accredited or financed by the host Member State on the basis of its legislation or administrative practice, for the principal purpose of following a course of study, including vocational training; and have comprehensive sickness insurance cover in the host Member State and assure the relevant national authority, by means of a declaration or by such equivalent means as they may choose, that they have sufficient resources for themselves and their family members not to become a burden on the social assistance system of the host Member State during their period of residence; or…”

The provisions of the Directive have been implemented in the UK by the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 (‘the 2006 Regulations’). As the 2006 Regulations have to be interpreted so far as possible in conformity with the Directive (and no-one suggests that that is not possible in this case), the court has to interpret the relevant provisions of the Directive. In the circumstances I put a summary of the relevant provisions of the 2006 Regulations in the