Updates, commentary, training and advice on immigration and asylum law

EU can point to clear precedents in Brexit court showdown | MLex market insight


Older content is locked

A great deal of time and effort goes into producing the information on Free Movement, become a member of Free Movement to get unlimited access to all articles, and much, much more


By becoming a member of Free Movement, you not only support the hard-work that goes into maintaining the website, but get access to premium features;

  • Single login for personal use
  • FREE downloads of Free Movement ebooks
  • Access to all Free Movement blog content
  • Access to all our online training materials
  • Access to our busy forums
  • Downloadable CPD certificates

Worth a read:

The Brexit negotiations are heading for an early battle.

The remaining EU states on Monday agreed that the rights of EU citizens living in the UK after its withdrawal should fall under the jurisdiction of the EU Court of Justice, or CJEU.

The UK wants to guarantee individuals’ rights, but rejects the oversight of the bloc’s top-tier court in Luxembourg.

“The simple truth is: we are leaving,” Brexit secretary David Davis has said. “We are going to be outside the reach of the European court.”

European Commission negotiators will be able to cite previous rulings that have set precedents and conditions for granting the CJEU jurisdiction over non-EU countries.

But such steps are nonetheless unusual — and could take years to approve.

Under the commission’s proposals approved by member states, EU citizens in the UK and British citizens in the rest of the bloc will keep their existing rights to healthcare, welfare and equal treatment for life.

The commission’s claim that the CJEU should have jurisdiction to enforce these rights is supported by three previous cases…

Source: EU can point to clear precedents in Brexit court showdown | MLex market insight

Relevant articles chosen for you
Picture of Colin Yeo

Colin Yeo

Immigration and asylum barrister, blogger, writer and consultant at Garden Court Chambers in London and founder of the Free Movement immigration law website.


One Response

  1. I read the opinion as protecting those family members who are family members at the time the EU national naturalises, but in Lounes, as far as I can tell, that was not the case. Ms Lounes had already naturalised before marrying, so her husband would not benefit from EU law.