2011 ZB Q7
Arturo is a Romanian champion rower who came to the UK in 2009 in order to improve his
performance by better training. He has worked in the UK as a rowing trainer since his arrival. He
has now taken time off to practice for the London Olympics in 2012. He still works part-time as a
personal fitness trainer for a Health Centre, but has to claim additional social security benefits.
He has now contracted a skin disease, which makes his participation in the Romanian Olympic
team doubtful, but he hopes this will be cured in time. He is a member of the Romanian Rowing
Federation which will send a rowing team to the Olympics.
Advise him on the following:
(a) He has been asked to leave by the UK immigration authorities because he is claiming social
security and because of this skin disease, with which they are afraid he might infect others.
(b) He would like to enrol in a university in the UK to study sports law, which he thinks will assist
him in furthering his career. However, the immigration authorities say he cannot do this, as he
does not have permanent residence in the UK.
(c) He has met and fallen in love with Olga, a Russian, some years ago and he would like to bring
her to the UK to live with him as his partner, but Olga has been refused entry by the UK
immigration authorities as she is not an EU national.
2012 ZB Q4
Discuss the extent to which the person in each of the following cases is protected under EU law
from attempts to deport them.
(a) Esmeralda is a Portuguese national who comes to the UK in order to take up employment in a
senior position with a newly created internet company, Yourlife, aimed at providing older
people with medical advice after they have undergone surgery for heart attacks or cancer.
She is refused entry on two counts:
(i) UK health policy is aimed at making official health advice as efficient as possible and
at minimizing the large amount of health advice available on websites, some of which it
considers to be detrimental to people’s health; and
(ii) Esmeralda only has 100 euros in cash with her and this is not considered sufficient by
the border officials.
(b) Hans is a Dutch house painter working in London. He has been employed for about ten hours
a week by an agency which pays his wages, with deduction of tax and national insurance
contributions. It is discovered that the agency has been employing some people in painting
and decorating jobs, but in reality, as couriers for a thriving drug-smuggling trade it maintains,
and that the painting and decorating side was purely a cover for this. Hans is in danger of
losing his job and decides to get out while he can. He obtains a number of jobs as a painter
and handyman from people who formerly employed him through the agency. Hans’ wife has
come casual cleaning jobs. They have a child of school age. Hans applied to the authorities in
the London Suburb where they live for income support, housing and child benefits. His
application is refused on the following grounds:
(i) He does not have enough work to maintain himself and his family; and
(ii) He is under suspicion of having had some ‘connection’ with the drug-smuggling
activities of the agency.
2012 ZB Q7
Lorna and Kevin are both US citizens who have lived and worked in Belgium for seven years.
They are employed as dancers with a leading ballet company in Brussels. They have two
children, aged five and six, who have Belgian nationality. The ballet company has fallen upon
hard times and both Lorna and Kevin lose their jobs. They apply for unemployment benefit, child
benefit and housing assistance to the Belgian authorities. This is refused and they are told that
they have to leave as they no longer have enough income to maintain themselves and their
children. Advise Lorna and Kevin as to any rights to remain and claim benefits they and their
children have under EU law.
2013 ZB Q2
Yasif is an Algerian national. He unlawfully entered in France in 2005 and applied for political
asylum. His application was eventually rejected in 2007. That year he met Dominique, a French
national. The couple fell in love and married in 2008 and now have two children. For a few years
,Yasif did various jobs. Dominique was employed by the University of Paris as an IT coordinator
until 2011 when she was made redundant. In 2012, Yasif applied for a residence permit and
residence document under European Union law as the husband of a Union citizen. Yasif argues,
in particular, that without a residence permit he has been unable to work, at least not lawfully. The
French authority refuses his applications. It also alerts the Immigration authorities who, after
considering Yasif’s status, decide to order his expulsion from France. In the meantime,
Dominique, following her redundancy, applies for unemployment and children benefits which are
duly granted. In 2013, Yasif decides to appeal against the decision to deport him. Yasif
challenges the decision on the grounds that:
(a) Articles 20 and 21 TFEU confer a right of residence upon a national of a non-member State
lawfully married to a citizen of the Union and the deportation order would have the effect of
depriving a EU citizen of the rights protected by those provisions;
(b) That Article 20 in conjunction with the provisions of Articles 21, 24 and 34 of the Charter of
Fundamental Rights, must be interpreted as meaning that the right of a minor child who is a
national of a Member State to reside in that State must entail the grant of a work permit to a
parent (who is a national of a non-member State) upon whom the child is dependent.
The French Court decides to stay proceedings and refers these questions to the CJEU.
You are the Advocate General assigned to the case; write your opinion.
2014 ZB Q4
John, a British national, came to Spain five years ago. He worked for a bank in Madrid until six
months ago when he was convicted and sentenced to twelve months in prison for possessing an
illegal firearm on bank premises. He is scheduled to be released next month, taking account of his
good behaviour. The Spanish authorities have stated that they will seek his deportation to the
United Kingdom immediately on his release. Carla, John's wife, is a Spanish national. She claims
that John’s deportation will leave her without any financial support and will endanger her
marriage. In addition, she will also have difficulties looking after their son Francisco, who has
learning difficulties. Advise John, Carla, and Francisco as to their rights under EU law.
2015 ZA Q6
In France, jobseekers who are in need of assistance may apply for the ‘basic benefits provision’ in
order, inter alia, to meet their subsistence needs. The benefits granted thereunder are intended to
enable recipients to lead a life in keeping with human dignity and are intended to cover basic
subsistence needs, accommodation and heating needs. Ms Popescu and her infant son, both
Romanian nationals, were refused by a local job centre the basic benefits provision. Ms Popescu
and her son (who was born in France) have been living in France in the apartment of one of Ms
Popescu’s sisters, who provides them with food and lodging. Ms Popescu has no professional
qualifications and, up until now, has not pursued any professional activity, either in France or in
Romania.
Ms Popescu instructs you as a lawyer as to challenge the decision of the national authority to
deny her and her son the ‘basic provision’.
2015 ZB Q3
According to Advocate General Colomer ‘the concept of citizenship, which entails a legal status
for individuals, means that the Member States must pay particular attention to individual legal
situations. The fundamental rights play a vital role in the performance of that task. As an integral
part of the status of citizenship, the fundamental rights strengthen the legal position of the
individual by introducing a decisive aspect for the purposes of substantive justice in the case
concerned. Holding their fundamental rights as prerogatives of freedom, citizens of the Union
afford their claims greater legitimacy. Moreover, in some cases, where a fundamental right is not
at stake but a clear injustice has been committed, citizenship can offer protection’. Do you agree?
Should citizenship become a sort of a panacea for any injustice?
2016 ZA Q4
Mette, a Danish national, and her husband Viktor, a Russian national, move to the UK from
Denmark with their two-year-old son, Frederic. The UK authorities grant residence permits to the
entire family. Mette has been offered a job as a journalist with a fashion magazine, Sparkle.
However, on the day Mette’s job is due to begin, the magazine’s publishers decide to close down
Sparkle in response to poor sales. Mette begins to search for another journalism job. In the
meantime, she finds work as a ‘runner’ for a reality television programme, making coffee, running
, errands and answering the telephone for two or three hours a day, for which she receives travel
expenses and modest remuneration. Mette’s earnings from working as a ‘runner’ are very low,
and after two months Mette and Viktor have exhausted their savings. Mette applies for
jobseeker’s allowance (the social security allowance paid to unemployed people) and child benefit
for Frederic. Mette is refused jobseeker’s allowance on the ground that she is not habitually
resident in the UK. She is also informed that she is not entitled to receive child benefit because
she has never worked in the UK. Viktor, who previously worked as an art teacher in Denmark,
and wishes to retrain to teach mathematics in the UK. He applies for a place on a teachertraining
course, and also for a bursary (a maintenance grant) offered by the UK government to encourage
applicants due to a national shortage of maths teachers. Viktor is told by the UK authorities that
he is not eligible for a bursary payable from public funds because he is not a national of an EU
Member State. Advise Mette and Viktor of any rights under European law.
2016 ZB Q4
John, a British national, moved to France with a view to settle there permanently. As a former
investment banker he had considerable holdings in shares in British companies and also savings
in a British bank, as well as private health insurance. He had therefore no problem obtaining a
residence permit from the French authorities. In 2015 he encountered considerable financial
difficulties. The value of his shares collapsed and the value of the pound in France deteriorated
sharply. In January 2016 he therefore took on an occasional job as a waiter in the local
restaurant, but given the slump in the economy also in France his services were only infrequently
called upon by the restaurant owner. He also has to seek hospital treatment. When he asks to be
treated in the local hospital he is asked to pay for his treatment. His private health insurance
refuses to cover the costs as he has fallen behind with his payments for the insurance. However,
he discovers that French nationals would receive the hospital treatment free of charge. What is
worse, when the French authorities hear about his request to be treated in the hospital free of
charge, they decide, without further investigation into his financial situation, to revoke his
residence permit on the ground that he no longer fulfils the necessary conditions for residence in
France. Advise John as to his rights under EU law.
2017 ZB Q3
John Kerry is an Irish rugby player. At the end of the 2015/16 season he was engaged by the
Paris Rugby Club to take part in the final stage of the French Rugby championship. Kerry played
two matches only for Paris and the team managed to win the league. After some complaints from
another club, the French Rugby Association decided to deduct five points from the score of the
Paris Rugby Club and award to another team the championship on the grounds that the Paris
Rugby Club should not have fielded Kerry. The Association argued that Mr Kerry’s move to the
Paris Rugby Club breached the rules concerning transfers of players. These rules prohibit clubs
from fielding in the national championship players coming from other leagues if they have been
transferred after the second half of the season. Mr Kerry asks your advice on whether rules of a
sports federation which prohibit a club from fielding a player in a competition if he has been
engaged after a specified date are compatible with the principle of freedom of movement for
workers. Advise Mr Kerry.
2018 ZA Q8
Karen is a single mother of Danish nationality, who has been living for the past six months in
Berlin (Germany). While looking for a full-time job, she works on a part-time basis in a travel
agency and is financially supported by her 20-year-old son, Jens. Karen’s latest application for the
post of a receptionist at the information desk of the Pergamon Museum in Berlin, which belongs to
the German State, was unsuccessful. The Museum justified the rejection on the following
grounds:
a) employment in the German public service is reserved to German nationals; and
b) all posts relating to German historical and cultural heritage can only be occupied by persons
with an in-depth knowledge of the German culture. Karen lacked the relevant qualifications. To
what extent can Karen rely on the freedom of movement of workers under EU law and can she
challenge the rejection of her job application by the Pergamon Museum?
2019 ZA Q3
Marcel is a French national who moved to Germany in 2005 with his mother, following the divorce
of his parents in 2004. He has since completed high school education, and married Elsa, a
German citizen. Marcel and Elsa now have two minor children. Marcel has never worked, and in
June 2018 he was arrested for drug trafficking. A deportation order was issued against him.
Marcel would like to know if he can rely on EU citizenship law in order to fight deportation.
Arturo is a Romanian champion rower who came to the UK in 2009 in order to improve his
performance by better training. He has worked in the UK as a rowing trainer since his arrival. He
has now taken time off to practice for the London Olympics in 2012. He still works part-time as a
personal fitness trainer for a Health Centre, but has to claim additional social security benefits.
He has now contracted a skin disease, which makes his participation in the Romanian Olympic
team doubtful, but he hopes this will be cured in time. He is a member of the Romanian Rowing
Federation which will send a rowing team to the Olympics.
Advise him on the following:
(a) He has been asked to leave by the UK immigration authorities because he is claiming social
security and because of this skin disease, with which they are afraid he might infect others.
(b) He would like to enrol in a university in the UK to study sports law, which he thinks will assist
him in furthering his career. However, the immigration authorities say he cannot do this, as he
does not have permanent residence in the UK.
(c) He has met and fallen in love with Olga, a Russian, some years ago and he would like to bring
her to the UK to live with him as his partner, but Olga has been refused entry by the UK
immigration authorities as she is not an EU national.
2012 ZB Q4
Discuss the extent to which the person in each of the following cases is protected under EU law
from attempts to deport them.
(a) Esmeralda is a Portuguese national who comes to the UK in order to take up employment in a
senior position with a newly created internet company, Yourlife, aimed at providing older
people with medical advice after they have undergone surgery for heart attacks or cancer.
She is refused entry on two counts:
(i) UK health policy is aimed at making official health advice as efficient as possible and
at minimizing the large amount of health advice available on websites, some of which it
considers to be detrimental to people’s health; and
(ii) Esmeralda only has 100 euros in cash with her and this is not considered sufficient by
the border officials.
(b) Hans is a Dutch house painter working in London. He has been employed for about ten hours
a week by an agency which pays his wages, with deduction of tax and national insurance
contributions. It is discovered that the agency has been employing some people in painting
and decorating jobs, but in reality, as couriers for a thriving drug-smuggling trade it maintains,
and that the painting and decorating side was purely a cover for this. Hans is in danger of
losing his job and decides to get out while he can. He obtains a number of jobs as a painter
and handyman from people who formerly employed him through the agency. Hans’ wife has
come casual cleaning jobs. They have a child of school age. Hans applied to the authorities in
the London Suburb where they live for income support, housing and child benefits. His
application is refused on the following grounds:
(i) He does not have enough work to maintain himself and his family; and
(ii) He is under suspicion of having had some ‘connection’ with the drug-smuggling
activities of the agency.
2012 ZB Q7
Lorna and Kevin are both US citizens who have lived and worked in Belgium for seven years.
They are employed as dancers with a leading ballet company in Brussels. They have two
children, aged five and six, who have Belgian nationality. The ballet company has fallen upon
hard times and both Lorna and Kevin lose their jobs. They apply for unemployment benefit, child
benefit and housing assistance to the Belgian authorities. This is refused and they are told that
they have to leave as they no longer have enough income to maintain themselves and their
children. Advise Lorna and Kevin as to any rights to remain and claim benefits they and their
children have under EU law.
2013 ZB Q2
Yasif is an Algerian national. He unlawfully entered in France in 2005 and applied for political
asylum. His application was eventually rejected in 2007. That year he met Dominique, a French
national. The couple fell in love and married in 2008 and now have two children. For a few years
,Yasif did various jobs. Dominique was employed by the University of Paris as an IT coordinator
until 2011 when she was made redundant. In 2012, Yasif applied for a residence permit and
residence document under European Union law as the husband of a Union citizen. Yasif argues,
in particular, that without a residence permit he has been unable to work, at least not lawfully. The
French authority refuses his applications. It also alerts the Immigration authorities who, after
considering Yasif’s status, decide to order his expulsion from France. In the meantime,
Dominique, following her redundancy, applies for unemployment and children benefits which are
duly granted. In 2013, Yasif decides to appeal against the decision to deport him. Yasif
challenges the decision on the grounds that:
(a) Articles 20 and 21 TFEU confer a right of residence upon a national of a non-member State
lawfully married to a citizen of the Union and the deportation order would have the effect of
depriving a EU citizen of the rights protected by those provisions;
(b) That Article 20 in conjunction with the provisions of Articles 21, 24 and 34 of the Charter of
Fundamental Rights, must be interpreted as meaning that the right of a minor child who is a
national of a Member State to reside in that State must entail the grant of a work permit to a
parent (who is a national of a non-member State) upon whom the child is dependent.
The French Court decides to stay proceedings and refers these questions to the CJEU.
You are the Advocate General assigned to the case; write your opinion.
2014 ZB Q4
John, a British national, came to Spain five years ago. He worked for a bank in Madrid until six
months ago when he was convicted and sentenced to twelve months in prison for possessing an
illegal firearm on bank premises. He is scheduled to be released next month, taking account of his
good behaviour. The Spanish authorities have stated that they will seek his deportation to the
United Kingdom immediately on his release. Carla, John's wife, is a Spanish national. She claims
that John’s deportation will leave her without any financial support and will endanger her
marriage. In addition, she will also have difficulties looking after their son Francisco, who has
learning difficulties. Advise John, Carla, and Francisco as to their rights under EU law.
2015 ZA Q6
In France, jobseekers who are in need of assistance may apply for the ‘basic benefits provision’ in
order, inter alia, to meet their subsistence needs. The benefits granted thereunder are intended to
enable recipients to lead a life in keeping with human dignity and are intended to cover basic
subsistence needs, accommodation and heating needs. Ms Popescu and her infant son, both
Romanian nationals, were refused by a local job centre the basic benefits provision. Ms Popescu
and her son (who was born in France) have been living in France in the apartment of one of Ms
Popescu’s sisters, who provides them with food and lodging. Ms Popescu has no professional
qualifications and, up until now, has not pursued any professional activity, either in France or in
Romania.
Ms Popescu instructs you as a lawyer as to challenge the decision of the national authority to
deny her and her son the ‘basic provision’.
2015 ZB Q3
According to Advocate General Colomer ‘the concept of citizenship, which entails a legal status
for individuals, means that the Member States must pay particular attention to individual legal
situations. The fundamental rights play a vital role in the performance of that task. As an integral
part of the status of citizenship, the fundamental rights strengthen the legal position of the
individual by introducing a decisive aspect for the purposes of substantive justice in the case
concerned. Holding their fundamental rights as prerogatives of freedom, citizens of the Union
afford their claims greater legitimacy. Moreover, in some cases, where a fundamental right is not
at stake but a clear injustice has been committed, citizenship can offer protection’. Do you agree?
Should citizenship become a sort of a panacea for any injustice?
2016 ZA Q4
Mette, a Danish national, and her husband Viktor, a Russian national, move to the UK from
Denmark with their two-year-old son, Frederic. The UK authorities grant residence permits to the
entire family. Mette has been offered a job as a journalist with a fashion magazine, Sparkle.
However, on the day Mette’s job is due to begin, the magazine’s publishers decide to close down
Sparkle in response to poor sales. Mette begins to search for another journalism job. In the
meantime, she finds work as a ‘runner’ for a reality television programme, making coffee, running
, errands and answering the telephone for two or three hours a day, for which she receives travel
expenses and modest remuneration. Mette’s earnings from working as a ‘runner’ are very low,
and after two months Mette and Viktor have exhausted their savings. Mette applies for
jobseeker’s allowance (the social security allowance paid to unemployed people) and child benefit
for Frederic. Mette is refused jobseeker’s allowance on the ground that she is not habitually
resident in the UK. She is also informed that she is not entitled to receive child benefit because
she has never worked in the UK. Viktor, who previously worked as an art teacher in Denmark,
and wishes to retrain to teach mathematics in the UK. He applies for a place on a teachertraining
course, and also for a bursary (a maintenance grant) offered by the UK government to encourage
applicants due to a national shortage of maths teachers. Viktor is told by the UK authorities that
he is not eligible for a bursary payable from public funds because he is not a national of an EU
Member State. Advise Mette and Viktor of any rights under European law.
2016 ZB Q4
John, a British national, moved to France with a view to settle there permanently. As a former
investment banker he had considerable holdings in shares in British companies and also savings
in a British bank, as well as private health insurance. He had therefore no problem obtaining a
residence permit from the French authorities. In 2015 he encountered considerable financial
difficulties. The value of his shares collapsed and the value of the pound in France deteriorated
sharply. In January 2016 he therefore took on an occasional job as a waiter in the local
restaurant, but given the slump in the economy also in France his services were only infrequently
called upon by the restaurant owner. He also has to seek hospital treatment. When he asks to be
treated in the local hospital he is asked to pay for his treatment. His private health insurance
refuses to cover the costs as he has fallen behind with his payments for the insurance. However,
he discovers that French nationals would receive the hospital treatment free of charge. What is
worse, when the French authorities hear about his request to be treated in the hospital free of
charge, they decide, without further investigation into his financial situation, to revoke his
residence permit on the ground that he no longer fulfils the necessary conditions for residence in
France. Advise John as to his rights under EU law.
2017 ZB Q3
John Kerry is an Irish rugby player. At the end of the 2015/16 season he was engaged by the
Paris Rugby Club to take part in the final stage of the French Rugby championship. Kerry played
two matches only for Paris and the team managed to win the league. After some complaints from
another club, the French Rugby Association decided to deduct five points from the score of the
Paris Rugby Club and award to another team the championship on the grounds that the Paris
Rugby Club should not have fielded Kerry. The Association argued that Mr Kerry’s move to the
Paris Rugby Club breached the rules concerning transfers of players. These rules prohibit clubs
from fielding in the national championship players coming from other leagues if they have been
transferred after the second half of the season. Mr Kerry asks your advice on whether rules of a
sports federation which prohibit a club from fielding a player in a competition if he has been
engaged after a specified date are compatible with the principle of freedom of movement for
workers. Advise Mr Kerry.
2018 ZA Q8
Karen is a single mother of Danish nationality, who has been living for the past six months in
Berlin (Germany). While looking for a full-time job, she works on a part-time basis in a travel
agency and is financially supported by her 20-year-old son, Jens. Karen’s latest application for the
post of a receptionist at the information desk of the Pergamon Museum in Berlin, which belongs to
the German State, was unsuccessful. The Museum justified the rejection on the following
grounds:
a) employment in the German public service is reserved to German nationals; and
b) all posts relating to German historical and cultural heritage can only be occupied by persons
with an in-depth knowledge of the German culture. Karen lacked the relevant qualifications. To
what extent can Karen rely on the freedom of movement of workers under EU law and can she
challenge the rejection of her job application by the Pergamon Museum?
2019 ZA Q3
Marcel is a French national who moved to Germany in 2005 with his mother, following the divorce
of his parents in 2004. He has since completed high school education, and married Elsa, a
German citizen. Marcel and Elsa now have two minor children. Marcel has never worked, and in
June 2018 he was arrested for drug trafficking. A deportation order was issued against him.
Marcel would like to know if he can rely on EU citizenship law in order to fight deportation.
